1Z0-829 Working with Streams and Lambda Expressions Practice Question
A financial services company has a microservice that processes trade confirmations. The service receives a stream of Trade objects (with fields: id (long), symbol (String), quantity (int), price (double)) and needs to compute the total value (quantity * price) for each symbol, but only for trades with quantity > 0 and price > 0. The result should be a Map<String, Double> mapping symbol to total value. The current implementation uses a for loop with manual aggregation, but it is error-prone and difficult to parallelize. The team decides to refactor using the Stream API. The DataSource provides a Stream<Trade> trades(). The code must be efficient and handle large datasets. Which approach best meets these requirements?
⚠ Common exam trap
Many candidates choose a `toMap` or `reduce` variant thinking they are more flexible, but they overlook the subtle correctness issues with mutable reduction or the need for a proper merge function in parallel streams, while `groupingBy` with a downstream collector is the intended pattern for this scenario.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
trades().filter(t -> t.quantity() > 0 && t.price() > 0).collect(Collectors.groupingBy(Trade::symbol, Collectors.summingDouble(t -> t.quantity() * t.price())))
It uses `Collectors.groupingBy` with a downstream `Collectors.summingDouble` collector, which is the idiomatic and efficient way to group trades by symbol and sum their computed values (quantity * price) after filtering out invalid trades. This approach is concise, leverages the Stream API's built-in parallelization support, and avoids manual accumulation or mutable state issues.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
trades().filter(t -> t.quantity() > 0 && t.price() > 0).collect(Collectors.groupingBy(Trade::symbol, Collectors.summingDouble(t -> t.quantity() * t.price())))
Why this is correct
Correct and idiomatic.
- ✗
trades().filter(t -> t.quantity() > 0 && t.price() > 0).collect(Collectors.toMap(Trade::symbol, t -> t.quantity() * t.price(), Double::sum))
Why it's wrong here
Works but toMap is not intended for grouping; groupingBy is more semantic.
- ✗
trades().filter(t -> t.quantity() > 0 && t.price() > 0).collect(Collectors.toMap(Trade::symbol, t -> t.quantity() * t.price(), (v1, v2) -> v1 + v2))
Why it's wrong here
Works but groupingBy is better for grouping operations.
- ✗
trades().filter(t -> t.quantity() > 0 && t.price() > 0).reduce(new HashMap<>(), (map, t) -> { map.merge(t.symbol(), t.quantity() * t.price(), Double::sum); return map; }, (m1, m2) -> { m1.putAll(m2); return m1; })
Why it's wrong here
Reduce with mutable accumulation is not recommended; combiner is incorrect (overwrites instead of merging).
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This 1Z0-829 question is part of Courseiva's 513-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 1Z0-829 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Oracle certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 1Z0-829 exam.