[SOLVED] awk

arn2025 · 03-29-2012, 12:14 PM

how do i search for ALL lines with field 5 having "0" in a huge txt file

jhwilliams · 03-29-2012, 12:18 PM

Code:

awk '($5==0)' huge.txt

MensaWater · 03-29-2012, 12:20 PM

awk '$5 ~ 0' filename

Linux_Kidd · 03-29-2012, 12:22 PM

awk '$5==0{print $0}' file
same as post #2, but demonstrates you can print out the line or any fields you like, etc.

replace , or ,, or ,,, with , then pipe it to awk
sed -i 's/,\+/,/g' file | awk -F "," '$5==0{print $0}'

arn2025 · 03-29-2012, 12:22 PM

This is part of the file, however the command awk '($5==0)' huge.txt did not return anything

Quote:

29,,0,,0,0,,0,,,22,,0,0,,25677212881000,-1,,8,,0,0,-1,256784456293,,281,0,60,0,4
CCN_MOD16,68687,1543,63974,0,658,0,283,,185,59,256777547728,05-FEB-12,79.285714,30,,,U:726120535:3526164791328448271::840750662,52430,05-FEB-12,,N,,506,320,,0,,0,0,,0,,,22,,0,0,,25677030212541000,-1,,8,,0,0,-1,256778647313,,192,17.07692,59,25.61538,4
CCN_MOD16,93222,2905,63225,0,658,0,287,,0,60,256800200028,05-FEB-12,0,0,,,U:1009230930:3526164791328448271::141632229,52430,05-FEB-12,,N,,656,656,,0,,0,0,,0,,,22,,0,0,,25677208352000,-1,,256,,0,0,-1,256783258338,,-1,0,60,0,4
CCN_MOD16,68688,1543,62873,0,658,0,283,,63,20,256782834338,05-FEB-12,27,30,,,U:1120701893:3526164791328448271::411062659,52430,05-FEB-12,,N,,576,513,,0,,0,0,,0,,,22,,0,0,,25677030207203000,-1,,8,,0,0,-1,256784647114,,192,5.81538,20,8.72308,4
CCN_MOD16,66249,2905,61915,0,658,0,283,,295,4,250788298313,05-FEB-12,0,0,,,U:79861

jhwilliams · 03-29-2012, 12:23 PM

@arn2025 You need to specify the correct field separator. ',' is not in IFS. Consult the Awk man page.

MensaWater · 03-29-2012, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhwilliams

@arn2025 You need to specify the correct field separator. ',' is not in IFS. Consult the Awk man page.

awk -F, will tell it to use comma as the field separator.

Linux_Kidd · 03-29-2012, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MensaWater

awk -F, will tell it to use comma as the field separator.

exactly.
i assumed the extra comma's were an issue, hence why my sed.

so if the comma counts are ok then
awk -F "," '$5==0{print $0}'
or
awk -F, '$5==0{print $0}'

MensaWater · 03-29-2012, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linux_Kidd

exactly.
i assumed the extra comma's were an issue, hence why my sed.

Your original post with sed was before the OP put his example in so how could you have known he had extra commas?

Anyway I don't think there are EXTRA commas based on what the OP put as example - just lines that don't have something in every field so the , delimiter is next to each other for the blank field.

Linux_Kidd · 03-29-2012, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MensaWater

Your original post with sed was before the OP put his example in so how could you have known he had extra commas?

Anyway I don't think there are EXTRA commas based on what the OP put as example - just lines that don't have something in every field so the , delimiter is next to each other for the blank field.

huh, his sample is on post #4, my answer in post #5.

MensaWater · 03-29-2012, 01:33 PM

Odd - On my display its the opposite. He is 4 and you are 5. But both show 1:22 PM (ET) so presumably you both posted at near the same time.

I was thinking maybe you were psychic.

Linux_Kidd · 04-03-2012, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MensaWater

Odd - On my display its the opposite. He is 4 and you are 5. But both show 1:22 PM (ET) so presumably you both posted at near the same time.

I was thinking maybe you were psychic.

i am still lost. you say here exactly as i did, his on 4 mine on 5, so mine came after his.

but his post has a weird date/time in the post header, its on 2 lines while all others are on one line.....?

MensaWater · 04-03-2012, 12:13 PM

I'm saying the post where you first mentioned sed on my screen shows up BEFORE the one where he gave sample output. So to me your later claim to have mentioned sed implied you knew what his output looked like before he provided it and I questioned your prescience.

On looking at it after you later reply I saw that both posts have a 1:22 PM ET time stamp so see that while it appears to me yours came before his it is quite possible it actually came after his and it is just the vagaries of the order the messages are displayed that makes it appear the opposite on my screen.

I won't go into 4 and 5 as for all I know you're seeing something completely different for those numbers than I am.

Not a big deal.