4 ms·
Yeah, I work with awk quite a lot and I find weird that they needed so many resources. Although I agree that for this problem Postgres looks like a better opti
by gjulianm 6y ago
Yeah, I work with awk quite a lot and I find weird that they needed so many resources.
Although I agree that for this problem Postgres looks like a better option, I wouldn't discard awk or other Unix tools. It is way faster than people think it is, easy to use and solves pretty well quite a lot of use cases, such as pre-processing records before database ingestion, aggregations, some simple queries on temporary data...
- tuatoru 6y agoAgreed. If you only have 64 MB of RAM to process your 329 GB, AWK's your tool. As you say, it's faster than many people think.
- ketanmaheshwari 6y agoOP here -- thank you for your comment. Just wanted to say that the resources were not needed. I simply had access to them and were not being used much at the time so thought why not try them.