Which description accurately defines a splitter-aggregator pair?

Which description accurately defines a splitter-aggregator pair?

• A. A method that splits a collection but does not re-aggregate
• B. A method that aggregates without splitting
• C. A method that processes all elements in a single batch
• D. A splitter-aggregator pair, where one flow splits the collection into elements and another flow re-aggregates

Answer: (D)

A splitter-aggregator pair describes a pattern where a collection is broken into individual messages, those messages are processed (often in parallel), and then the results are combined back into a single message by an aggregator. The idea is to split work into smaller pieces, run them separately, and reassemble the outcomes into one coherent result. This description matches that pattern: one flow takes the collection and splits it into elements, and another flow handles re-assembling the processed results into a single, aggregated message. Splitting without re-aggregation wouldn’t complete the pattern, and aggregating without splitting wouldn’t involve breaking the collection into individual messages. Processing all elements in a single batch also bypasses the splitter-aggregator approach, since there’s no subsequent reassembly of multiple parts.

A splitter-aggregator pair describes a pattern where a collection is broken into individual messages, those messages are processed (often in parallel), and then the results are combined back into a single message by an aggregator. The idea is to split work into smaller pieces, run them separately, and reassemble the outcomes into one coherent result.

This description matches that pattern: one flow takes the collection and splits it into elements, and another flow handles re-assembling the processed results into a single, aggregated message. Splitting without re-aggregation wouldn’t complete the pattern, and aggregating without splitting wouldn’t involve breaking the collection into individual messages. Processing all elements in a single batch also bypasses the splitter-aggregator approach, since there’s no subsequent reassembly of multiple parts.