Sort not sorting lines with a pipe '|' in it correctly
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am trying to sort some simple pipe-delimited data. However, sort isn't actually sorting. It moves my header row to the bottom, but my two rows starting with 241 are being split by a row starting with 24.
cat sort_fail.csv
column_a|column_b|column_c
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
The column headers are being moved to the bottom of the file, so sort is clearly processing it. But, the actual values aren't being sorted like I'd expect.
In this case I worked around it with
sort sort_fail.csv --field-separator='|' -k1,1
But, I feel like that shouldn't be necessary. Why is sort not sorting?
sort
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am trying to sort some simple pipe-delimited data. However, sort isn't actually sorting. It moves my header row to the bottom, but my two rows starting with 241 are being split by a row starting with 24.
cat sort_fail.csv
column_a|column_b|column_c
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
The column headers are being moved to the bottom of the file, so sort is clearly processing it. But, the actual values aren't being sorted like I'd expect.
In this case I worked around it with
sort sort_fail.csv --field-separator='|' -k1,1
But, I feel like that shouldn't be necessary. Why is sort not sorting?
sort
New contributor
1
useLC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also needLC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am trying to sort some simple pipe-delimited data. However, sort isn't actually sorting. It moves my header row to the bottom, but my two rows starting with 241 are being split by a row starting with 24.
cat sort_fail.csv
column_a|column_b|column_c
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
The column headers are being moved to the bottom of the file, so sort is clearly processing it. But, the actual values aren't being sorted like I'd expect.
In this case I worked around it with
sort sort_fail.csv --field-separator='|' -k1,1
But, I feel like that shouldn't be necessary. Why is sort not sorting?
sort
New contributor
I am trying to sort some simple pipe-delimited data. However, sort isn't actually sorting. It moves my header row to the bottom, but my two rows starting with 241 are being split by a row starting with 24.
cat sort_fail.csv
column_a|column_b|column_c
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
The column headers are being moved to the bottom of the file, so sort is clearly processing it. But, the actual values aren't being sorted like I'd expect.
In this case I worked around it with
sort sort_fail.csv --field-separator='|' -k1,1
But, I feel like that shouldn't be necessary. Why is sort not sorting?
sort
sort
New contributor
New contributor
edited 30 mins ago
muru
35.3k582157
35.3k582157
New contributor
asked 5 hours ago
user10777668
282
282
New contributor
New contributor
1
useLC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also needLC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
useLC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also needLC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago
1
1
use
LC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also need LC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago
use
LC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also need LC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
sort
is locale aware, so depending on your LC_COLLATE setting (which is inherited from LANG) you may different results:
$ LANG=C sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
241|213|20810376
24|121|2810172
column_a|column_b|column_c
$ LANG=en_US sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
This can cause problems in scripts, because you may not be aware of what the calling locale is set to, and so may get different results.
It's not uncommon for scripts to force the setting needed
eg
$ grep LC.*sort /bin/precat
LC_COLLATE=C sort -u | prezip-bin -z "$cmd: $2"
Now what's interesting, here, is the |
character looks odd.
But that's because the default rule for en_US, which derives from ISO, says
$ grep 007C /usr/share/i18n/locales/iso14651_t1_common
<U007C> IGNORE;IGNORE;IGNORE;<j> # 142 |
Which means the |
character is ignored and the sort order would be as if the character doesn't exist..
$ tr -d '|' < sort_fail.csv | LANG=C sort
24121220810378
241212810172
24121320810376
column_acolumn_bcolumn_c
And that matches the "unexpected" sorting you are seeing.
The work arounds are to use -n
(to force numeric sorts), or to use the field separator (as you did) or to use the C
locale.
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare
– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
What irritates me is that the 24
doesn't move from its place between the two 241
. The second field starts with a 1
. Trying the sort with a leading 4
in the second field, the 24
is moved down, so I suspect sort
just ignores the |
unless told otherwise.
Try sort -n
...
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
-n, --numeric-sort
compare according to string numerical value
210
23
Without the -n, 210 by text is ahead of 23 as it goes character my character.
New contributor
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
sort
is locale aware, so depending on your LC_COLLATE setting (which is inherited from LANG) you may different results:
$ LANG=C sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
241|213|20810376
24|121|2810172
column_a|column_b|column_c
$ LANG=en_US sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
This can cause problems in scripts, because you may not be aware of what the calling locale is set to, and so may get different results.
It's not uncommon for scripts to force the setting needed
eg
$ grep LC.*sort /bin/precat
LC_COLLATE=C sort -u | prezip-bin -z "$cmd: $2"
Now what's interesting, here, is the |
character looks odd.
But that's because the default rule for en_US, which derives from ISO, says
$ grep 007C /usr/share/i18n/locales/iso14651_t1_common
<U007C> IGNORE;IGNORE;IGNORE;<j> # 142 |
Which means the |
character is ignored and the sort order would be as if the character doesn't exist..
$ tr -d '|' < sort_fail.csv | LANG=C sort
24121220810378
241212810172
24121320810376
column_acolumn_bcolumn_c
And that matches the "unexpected" sorting you are seeing.
The work arounds are to use -n
(to force numeric sorts), or to use the field separator (as you did) or to use the C
locale.
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare
– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
sort
is locale aware, so depending on your LC_COLLATE setting (which is inherited from LANG) you may different results:
$ LANG=C sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
241|213|20810376
24|121|2810172
column_a|column_b|column_c
$ LANG=en_US sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
This can cause problems in scripts, because you may not be aware of what the calling locale is set to, and so may get different results.
It's not uncommon for scripts to force the setting needed
eg
$ grep LC.*sort /bin/precat
LC_COLLATE=C sort -u | prezip-bin -z "$cmd: $2"
Now what's interesting, here, is the |
character looks odd.
But that's because the default rule for en_US, which derives from ISO, says
$ grep 007C /usr/share/i18n/locales/iso14651_t1_common
<U007C> IGNORE;IGNORE;IGNORE;<j> # 142 |
Which means the |
character is ignored and the sort order would be as if the character doesn't exist..
$ tr -d '|' < sort_fail.csv | LANG=C sort
24121220810378
241212810172
24121320810376
column_acolumn_bcolumn_c
And that matches the "unexpected" sorting you are seeing.
The work arounds are to use -n
(to force numeric sorts), or to use the field separator (as you did) or to use the C
locale.
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare
– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
sort
is locale aware, so depending on your LC_COLLATE setting (which is inherited from LANG) you may different results:
$ LANG=C sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
241|213|20810376
24|121|2810172
column_a|column_b|column_c
$ LANG=en_US sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
This can cause problems in scripts, because you may not be aware of what the calling locale is set to, and so may get different results.
It's not uncommon for scripts to force the setting needed
eg
$ grep LC.*sort /bin/precat
LC_COLLATE=C sort -u | prezip-bin -z "$cmd: $2"
Now what's interesting, here, is the |
character looks odd.
But that's because the default rule for en_US, which derives from ISO, says
$ grep 007C /usr/share/i18n/locales/iso14651_t1_common
<U007C> IGNORE;IGNORE;IGNORE;<j> # 142 |
Which means the |
character is ignored and the sort order would be as if the character doesn't exist..
$ tr -d '|' < sort_fail.csv | LANG=C sort
24121220810378
241212810172
24121320810376
column_acolumn_bcolumn_c
And that matches the "unexpected" sorting you are seeing.
The work arounds are to use -n
(to force numeric sorts), or to use the field separator (as you did) or to use the C
locale.
sort
is locale aware, so depending on your LC_COLLATE setting (which is inherited from LANG) you may different results:
$ LANG=C sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
241|213|20810376
24|121|2810172
column_a|column_b|column_c
$ LANG=en_US sort sort_fail.csv
241|212|20810378
24|121|2810172
241|213|20810376
column_a|column_b|column_c
This can cause problems in scripts, because you may not be aware of what the calling locale is set to, and so may get different results.
It's not uncommon for scripts to force the setting needed
eg
$ grep LC.*sort /bin/precat
LC_COLLATE=C sort -u | prezip-bin -z "$cmd: $2"
Now what's interesting, here, is the |
character looks odd.
But that's because the default rule for en_US, which derives from ISO, says
$ grep 007C /usr/share/i18n/locales/iso14651_t1_common
<U007C> IGNORE;IGNORE;IGNORE;<j> # 142 |
Which means the |
character is ignored and the sort order would be as if the character doesn't exist..
$ tr -d '|' < sort_fail.csv | LANG=C sort
24121220810378
241212810172
24121320810376
column_acolumn_bcolumn_c
And that matches the "unexpected" sorting you are seeing.
The work arounds are to use -n
(to force numeric sorts), or to use the field separator (as you did) or to use the C
locale.
answered 3 hours ago
Stephen Harris
23.7k24376
23.7k24376
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare
– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
add a comment |
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare
– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
Fascinating. I did see some other hits about localization, but figured that would impact the relative ordering of 24 vs 241, not something like this.
– user10777668
3 hours ago
1
1
something extra useful in GNU sort is the
--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
something extra useful in GNU sort is the
--debug
option, which indicates the key (underlined) used to compare– Jeff Schaller
26 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
What irritates me is that the 24
doesn't move from its place between the two 241
. The second field starts with a 1
. Trying the sort with a leading 4
in the second field, the 24
is moved down, so I suspect sort
just ignores the |
unless told otherwise.
Try sort -n
...
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
What irritates me is that the 24
doesn't move from its place between the two 241
. The second field starts with a 1
. Trying the sort with a leading 4
in the second field, the 24
is moved down, so I suspect sort
just ignores the |
unless told otherwise.
Try sort -n
...
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
What irritates me is that the 24
doesn't move from its place between the two 241
. The second field starts with a 1
. Trying the sort with a leading 4
in the second field, the 24
is moved down, so I suspect sort
just ignores the |
unless told otherwise.
Try sort -n
...
What irritates me is that the 24
doesn't move from its place between the two 241
. The second field starts with a 1
. Trying the sort with a leading 4
in the second field, the 24
is moved down, so I suspect sort
just ignores the |
unless told otherwise.
Try sort -n
...
answered 5 hours ago
RudiC
3,7581312
3,7581312
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
-n, --numeric-sort
compare according to string numerical value
210
23
Without the -n, 210 by text is ahead of 23 as it goes character my character.
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
-n, --numeric-sort
compare according to string numerical value
210
23
Without the -n, 210 by text is ahead of 23 as it goes character my character.
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
-n, --numeric-sort
compare according to string numerical value
210
23
Without the -n, 210 by text is ahead of 23 as it goes character my character.
New contributor
-n, --numeric-sort
compare according to string numerical value
210
23
Without the -n, 210 by text is ahead of 23 as it goes character my character.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 2 hours ago
michaelkrieger
161
161
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
user10777668 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user10777668 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user10777668 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user10777668 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f487458%2fsort-not-sorting-lines-with-a-pipe-in-it-correctly%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
use
LC_COLLATE=C sort
. Depending on what you're expecting, you may also needLC_COLLATE=C sort -t'|' -n
– mosvy
5 hours ago