On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 1:48 AM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> wrote: > I see what you are saying -- this is what I meant by eventual > consistency guarantee.
Understood. > What is unclear to me is, why you need to re-group the KTable? The issue > you describe only occurs for this operation. The transactions I need to aggregate have a different primary key (tx id) than the resulting exposure (account #, security id). Each transaction also carries the (account #, security id) attributes, but they aren't unique. If I understand correctly, I need to regroup if I'd like to aggregate on (account #, security id). If there is an alternative approach without re-grouping, I'm more than happy to try it. Thanks, Thilo
