Interviewing as a Software Engineer

20 minute read

Interviewing is hard. In different ways for both parties. On the hiring side, you need to have a good framework for evaluation in place, and make sure that your engineers understand and apply that effectively. Failure to do so leads to bias, indecision and ambiguity in decisions. Which isn’t great for either party.

For candidates it’s a stressful situation. They’re under the spotlight in a way that is not really natural. Simple things like typing or defining a function can feel much harder under pressure. The candidate is also investing themselves emotionally in the process. Talking about your experience and goals puts you in a vulnerable position.1

If you’re on the hiring side, your interview process is not just a means for you to hire – it’s also an effective way to advertise for your company’s brand. No matter the outcome of the process, the candidate should be walking away with a great impression of your engineers, your hiring process, and your company.

Intended audience and scope

I’m mostly writing this post for my brother who’s graduating soon. It should be useful for anyone looking to land a job at FAANG or other top-tier tech companies.

The interview process at top tier companies

Among the companies I’ve interviewed and landed offers from, their interview processes look roughly the same. The process is split between a qualifying and an on-site portion.2

Qualifying interviews

  1. Chat with a recruiter
  2. Programming
  3. Chat with manager

On-site interviews

These do differ slightly between companies. E.g. some companies don’t have the manager chat in the qualifying round of interviews, and some have several programming challenges during the on-site.

The qualifying interviews are intended to assess the candidate’s probability of success for the on-site interviews. In my experience, they’re more brief but roughly equal in difficulty to the on-site interviews.


Some of the interviews overlap in their rubric, for instance the programming interviews are most often judged in similar fashions. I’ll try to not repeat myself too much below.

Chat with a recruiter

The initial step of the process is a chat with a recruiter. Most times they’ll ask you about your past experiences, and why you’re looking for a new opportunity. They’re also looking to see that you would fit into the culture at the company you’re applying to.

This interview is all about making a good impression as a person. Even though you might not be applying to a new job for a positive reason, you have to play the game and turn that into a positive, or leave it out:

Make sure you let them know you’d be excited to work for them! Barring anything strange popping up, the recruiter screen mostly feels like a sanity check before kicking off the real process.


This is not an interview itself, but it’s common to all interviews and by far one of the most important skills you will be judged on as an engineer.

Whether the interview has you programming, sketching a system, or talking to someone – you will be judged on how you communicate. This is true both when the interview is going well and when it is going poorly.

During the practical interviews, you’re being judged on how you’re approaching the problem. Make sure you communicate, not just what you’re doing, but what you’re thinking about doing next.

If you’re stuck when debugging something, say that out loud: “I’m now stuck, because I don’t know X”. Then proceed to let the interviewer know how you’ll try to forge ahead.

In all the places I’ve worked, candidates can receive a hire recommendation despite bombing an interview, but that’s prefaced on knowing why the candidate did poorly during that phase of the process. Remember that the interviewer’s trying to get a good signal in order to evaluate you.

A good candidate doesn’t just give great answers when prompted, but also asks great questions of the interviewers. Some of the greatest interviews I’ve had, the candidate has been in the driver’s seat from getting their prompt - they’re asking all the questions and driving the problem forward.

Lastly, make sure that you’re receptive to feedback and questions. If the interviewer is hinting about something, hear them out. There’s nothing worse than an interview where the candidate is adamant about their solution. Most interviews can be at least somewhat collaborative.


This section covers both programming in the qualifying and during the on-site.

The programming challenge is different depending on organization. Apart from Google and Facebook, most companies I’ve interviewed for have a simple programming challenge3.

At a former employer, this was a take-home challenge that you solved in an online editor where you write and run tests. If you passed the take-home challenge, you’d discuss the solution with an engineer, possibly make some minor improvements, and then solve an extension to the exercise.

At other places, the coding challenges have all been done in CoderPad. It’ll be very much worth your time to try out the platform. Make sure you’re familiar with how to both write code and tests using their editor.

Some places allow you to use your own setup. If you plan on using your own setup, make sure you’re able to both run code, tests, and use a debugger.

When it comes to the type of challenges, I’ll give a couple of examples of things that could pop up4:

From the hiring side, when giving problems like these, what do you look for?

Structure both in terms of code and approach

Most of these interviews contain some form of problem statement for the challenge, usually as a short text snippet. These problem statements are rarely complete don’t jump in straight away. Just like in real life, you’ll need to ask questions in order to figure out the invariants. Maybe you can even skip some portions that you originally envisioned you had to provide. Note and ask about edge cases.

When you start implementing the code, think about the function, its arguments and return value before writing any implementation. E.g. in Java

public List<Color> parseColors(String input) {
  // TODO - implement
  return List.of();

or Python:

def parse_colors(input: str) -> list[Color]:
  # TODO - implement
  return []

that way you can already now scaffold a simple hello-world test. Does the given prompt contain any examples for expected output? Encode those as tests too!

It’s not important that you know the stdlib APIs of your language, but make sure that you’re familiar with common operations. Most importantly you should be able to write idiomatic and well-structured code.

Once you’re done with your initial take, go over it. Did you miss anything? Should you improve the phrasing anywhere? Are there more edge-cases? Have you tested all examples?

Don’t be afraid to run your code often, this exercise is supposed to show the interviewer how you work in your day to day. Would you write all the code before hitting run or compile? Or would you do it piecemeal? Probably the latter unless you use a very sophisticated editor.

In none of the places where I’ve interviewed candidates have we “deducted points” for when the program doesn’t compile or give the expected output on the first try. It is, however, quite common that I see folks writing a lot of code without knowing if it’ll parse or compile. It puts these candidates at a disadvantage. They’ll have to spend a bunch of time fixing their mistakes before seeing if the code actually does what it is supposed to.

Another consideration is just how testable your code is. Sometimes you’ll be asked to write a function that is side-effectful in nature. It requires access to randomness or perhaps reading something from the environment. This makes testing your solution effectively, a lot harder. Consider creating an internal function that you can delegate to:

public static User createUser() {
  var uuid = UUID.randomUUID();
  return createuser(uuid);

static createUser(UUID uuid) { ... }

now you can test the package private one deterministically.

Language proficiency

Make sure you’re able to fluidly write code in your chosen language. Most companies would be happy for you to search the web for how to do things, that is an important part of your real job.

That being said, you should probably not be searching for how to do basic things in your language. You should know how to iterate through collections, how to use common data structures like sets, maps, and lists.

Be up-to-date on the language of choice, but don’t unnecessarily lean into advanced features. If you choose Java, do you know about modern additions like var? If you choose JavaScript, do you know how to destructure maps and lists?

You should also know how to test given your language of choice. That means familiarizing yourself with unit testing frameworks.

Chat with a manager

This is usually scheduled with the hiring manager, the person who’ll likely be your direct superior. During this interview you’ll likely discuss your experience at previous employers, your greatest accomplishments, biggest regrets, as well as your future goals. Be ready to answer why you’re looking for a new opportunity.

It’s a really good idea to look up company values before these types of interviews. Most companies will post these on their website.

Your answers don’t have to be clever, especially when asked about regrets and weaknesses. Be genuine. If you made a mistake, show that you learned something from it. When describing your weaknesses, don’t turn them into strengths. Show that you’re aware of them and let the interviewer know how you handle them.5

When discussing your past contributions, be concrete. Sometimes engineers who do a lot of cross team collaboration and glue work, feel like their work wasn’t as important as the ones who wrote the code and will hand-wave. I say, it is as important, own it!

This brings us to goals. For junior engineers, I know it’s hard to be concrete here. Here you’ve got to play the game, the interviewer has probably let you in on what the team is about, be cognizant of that in your goals. Does the org or team align with your goals?

I’ve sometimes seen people ask about mobility within the company. Sometimes that’s a great selling point, but bear in mind that the hiring manager is most likely trying to fill a slot on their team and would probably not want to see you move teams in the near future.

As an individual contributor, the manager is also looking to see that you’re easy to collaborate with. No matter how senior you are, show that you’re coach-able.


I’ve seen a few versions of this. Spotify had an interesting one, where we role-played that a service was misbehaving and it was up to me to diagnose it.

Others present you with some code where you attempt to diagnose, fix and verify the issue.

The Systems architecture section has some overlap with debugging a service, so I’ll focus on debugging code in this section.


Fixing bugs is something every engineer does, even if it wasn’t them who introduced the error. The point of these types of exercises is to see how you diagnose and fix issues. Sometimes you’ll be given a failing test-case which you can use as an entry point. Sometimes, you’ll need to recreate the error yourself. If you can, capture the issue in a unit test.

How you navigate the codebase is important here. Do you wildly grep and pray? Or do you have a methodical approach to finding the root cause?

When you’ve an IDE where you can jump to definition, that’s most commonly enough to navigate the code. If you’re using a dynamic language without such support, grep might be justified.

Try to build an intuition for how the code is structured, and then build a hypothesis. Once you have an idea, try to confirm it somehow. If it proves false, abandon it and backtrack to the last place where you had a firm footing.

Don’t try to read all of the code. Most likely if you’re given a repo, it’ll be too large for you to be able to digest and fix the error within the allotted time.

Making progress is key, most likely you won’t have to solve the bug in order to pass the interview. Build an intuition for the structure of the code come up with a hypothesis, confirm or reject, iterate.

Proficiency with language and tools

I cannot recommend enough that you’re strategic in your choice of language and setup. I’ve seen candidates choose a language that they’d like to work in (Haskell), and failed miserably because they’re either not proficient enough in it - or they’re not able to get their setup to work for the interview. Most commonly, people can’t get the debugger to work properly, or the language server doesn’t work for one of the common tool chains (Stack vs Cabal, Maven vs Gradle).

Also, make sure you’re able to build and modify sample projects. Clone something from GitHub and try to build it, change some tests, run them, use the debugger. These are basic things you should know how to do.

Learn how to set breakpoints, what stepping in, out and over mean, and how to evaluate expressions.

If your language of choice has several package or build managers (yarn vs npm, maven vs gradle, stack vs cabal), it’s a good idea to be able to do the above for all of them!

What about debug by print statements? That can be fine, make sure you’re methodical there as well. Try to print relevant things, not just "HERE"!

Systems architecture

I really love giving systems architecture interviews. They’re a lot more open than some of the other interviews. As such, there is so much to write on the subject of this interview type.

Some of the design interviews talk about API design, and some of them focus solely on building a system with different standard components.

When it comes to designing a good HTTP API, I recommend reading up on how to create a REST API. It’s not a panacea and there are times when diverging from RESTful APIs leads to better design, but as a starting point it’s a good tool to have in your toolbox.

Let’s focus on the interview type where you’re asked to design a system. In this type of interview, assume general components. RDBMS over Postgres, NoSQL over MongoDB or DynamoDB, pub-sub over Kafka, message queue over SQS. Specific knowledge of how these types of components work and scale is a must to succeed in this interview.

A case study

Here’s an example prompt for a design interview:

Our company Weta, wants to track how often a certain component is interacted with on our website. Your task is to design the system that records the users’ interactions like “hover-in”, “hover-out”, “click” on uniquely identifiable components.

The data should be available to our teams via a web UI.

Gathering requirements

This should be enough for you to start gathering requirements. Divide these into “Functional” and “Non-functional” requirements.

Functional requirements
Describes what the system does and how it should do them
Non-functional requirements
Describe what the performance characteristics of the system should be

In our case study, we need to ask clarifying questions to determine what goes into each category. These interviews tend to run around 45 minutes to an hour. As such, it’s important to make sure what is actually in scope. The interviewer is probably happy to answer any such question.

Another consideration is whether to go for a completely scalable solution, or an MVP at first, ask your interviewer. For our case, let’s go for the scalable solution.

Here are some questions I’d ask to determine requirements:

Functional requirements

  • Ability to specify event types with different payloads
  • For now, only work with the “click” event which should have a timestamp along with the ID of the component (string)
  • The operator UI should be able to query the data by hour of day

Non-functional requirements

  • The data does not have to appear immediately in the operator UI, a lag of 15 minutes is an acceptable SLO
  • The system can be eventually consistent
  • Our startup has around 200k active users with peak traffic of about 4 million interactions per minute (~67k interactions per second, at 20 interactions per user)
  • We can endure some data loss, but we should be able to gauge usage reliably
  • The operator UI should have an up-time of three nines (99.9%)
  • Our users are primarily in Europe, but we’ve plans to expand to North America

Depending on the interviewer they could elect to simplify the situation. For instance, by limiting scale or responsiveness. Or by restricting the input and output of the system. In the requirements above, we have a simple query pattern, a single event to deal with, and some acceptable data loss!

Proposing an initial solution

Given that we can allow some data loss, we’d be best of batching interactions on the client side. Instead of 20 interactions being sent per minute and user we can reduce that to one request per minute and user.

\[\frac{200'000 \text{ users}}{60 \text{ seconds}} \approx 3300 \text{ requests / second}\]

A sample of such a request might be:

// A POST request to `/interactions`
    "event_type": "click",
    "occurred_at": <epoch ms>,
    "component_id": <string>

It’s good to mention here that there would need to be some authentication mechanism, but we’ll scope that out.

The recipient service has one job, to put these requests on a message queue.

graph LR A(JS client) -->|POST /interactions| B{Load Balancer}; B --> D(ingestion-srv) B --> E(ingestion-srv) B --> F(...) D --> G([Message queue service]) E --> G F --> G

The JS client posts to a known gateway that distributes the traffic to our service, ingestion-srv. We’re batching the requests on the client, but can scale the amount of services here to accommodate an increase in traffic.

After putting the message on a queue, we’ll consume that message on the other side:

graph LR A([Message queue service]) --> B(consumer-srv) A --> C(consumer-srv) A --> D(...) B --> E[(Database)] C --> E[(Database)] D --> E[(Database)]

At our current peak traffic, a single consumer is likely to suffice. At this point we have another opportunity to batch. This time, we would like to batch increments to the counter for each component ID and hour. We can enable this by partitioning the messages by component ID when we enqueue them - note that this means we can batch on both ingestion-srv and consumer-srv.

Given our current batching strategy, it’s somewhat feasible that we’ll be able to amortize the writes to be linear to the amount of components on the page. Even with hundreds of components, any RDBMS should be able to handle so many updates.

We’ve yet to add the UI component. Since this system is write heavy, it’s worth adding read replicas to the database. Our UI service will then read from that replica:

graph LR A[(Database)] -.-> B[(Read replica)] B --> C(ui-srv) B --> D(ui-srv) B --> E(...)

At this point we have a complete system that satisfies the requirements. Now is a good time to go through the design and note weaknesses. What does cost efficiency look like for this solution? Where are the bottlenecks? How does this scale if we increase the traffic? Does it require operator intervention? Can we seamlessly scale this to multiple regions? Can we distribute the database? Do we need caching? How do we monitor this system?

Show the interviewer that you’re thinking about these things, in most cases these interviews contain a decent amount of back and forth.

Standard blocks to know about

This is a non-exhaustive list of standard components that you’d do well to know about. Just like with programming languages, learning one type is a transferable skill. Learn the invariants of each ones! How they scale, what their strengths and weaknesses are.


We usually talk about scaling in two terms, horizontal and vertical. If we want to scale our application, we can either run it on a more powerful machine, this is vertical scaling. Or we can distribute it on many machines, this is horizontal scaling.

Load balancers

A load balancer works as a proxy and distributes traffic across multiple machines. Their main purpose is to be able to increase the amount of concurrent requests to a service. Load balancers work at different levels of the OSI stack – think application level vs network level.

There are different strategies for distributing the load, most notably:

Round robin
Distributing traffic evenly across machines
Sticky sessions
Directing a user’s traffic to the same machine for the duration of a session

There’s a lot to say about databases. So let’s simplify things. There are two categories of databases you should be concerned with - relational and NoSQL. They’re good for different things, but there is some overlap.

Relational databases store data in tables with pre-defined formats and rules. They are flexible in that they allow you to join data in arbitrary ways. They’re great for structured data – to simplify, if you would store the data in a spreadsheet, a SQL database is probably a fine choice. Another advantage of relational databases is that they’re ACID. Further atomicity is exposed to the user via transactions, where multiple mutations can execute as a single all or nothing operation.

With the right schema, a relational database can easily handle tens of thousands of inserts per second.

In terms of scalability, the responsibility lands on the developer to define the schema in such a way that the tables can be distributed on many machines – as well as adding the logic to the application. There are systems like Vitess for MySQL that allow you to distribute your database without manual sharding at the application level.

NoSQL databases are typically not relational and handle dynamically structured data such as JSON blobs, documents, key value pairs and graphs.

While relational databases can scale vertically as can be seen above, they require manual sharding to scale horizontally. NoSQL databases attempt offer horizontal scaling without manual sharding of the database.

Familiarizing yourself with MongoDB is a good idea, it has an online playground and several easy to follow tutorials.

If your access pattern is key-value based and/or non-relational, NoSQL databases might be for you.

So, how do you choose? Like everything in this interview: it depends. If you know that your data model has a very specific shape, like time series or key-value, then I’d consider a NoSQL database from the get-go. Otherwise, a safe bet is to choose a relational database until such time that you cannot survive with vertical scaling alone and need to shard the data in order to scale. At that juncture, I’d discuss the pros and cons with the interviewer and decide based on the requirements whether to invest in sharding the SQL database, introducing something like Vitess, or migrate to a NoSQL solution.

Message queues and topics

There are different types of messaging systems you should be aware of. In general, you can split them into queues and topics. A queue works like you’d expect, you push a message onto the queue and then you dequeue it at the other end, FIFO.

Queues operating in FIFO mode have limitations on their throughput, AWS SQS in FIFO allows at most 300 enqueues per second - or at most 3000 messages when batching.

Using a queue, you can think of your consumer(s) only receiving the message once. But not exactly once. Usual messaging systems can only guarantee that messages will be delivered at least once when failure happens. This implies that any action consumers take should be idempotent. A drawback to using FIFO queues is that scaling can be harder to achieve.

Publish subscribe systems like Kafka, Kinesis or Google Pub/Sub have topics instead of queues. A topic is similar on the producer side. On the consumer side, each consumer receives all the messages from the topic. This is great if you need to do a number of different things per message that are orthogonal to each other.

Topics scale by partition. Each partition can have one consumer per consumer group and thus your consumers can scale with the number of partitions. Typically you decide statically how many partitions you will have, and can modify this if you see the need to scale the number of consumers based on e.g. consumer lag. A partition key can usually be manually determined, in our case study, we chose the component ID as the partition key. The system then distributes your messages on the different partitions. Systems like Kafka guarantee ordering per-partition and not per-topic.

A system like Kafka can typically process ~900k transactions per second on a single partition, depending of course on message size.

Monitoring and alerting

There are several monitoring solutions to consider. Cloud providers typically provide their own (AWS CloudWatch, Google Operation Suite). At the most basic level these should give you insight into how your system performs.

These systems can integrate with paging services like PagerDuty, Opsgenie and more. The paging services will text you, send you a notification, or even call you. Typically if you don’t respond, the page will escalate to someone else on your team, and then up the food chain.

As a rule of thumb, I wouldn’t page on things like CPU usage. Instead page on input, output, and potentially throughput of your system.

In our case study good alerting would cover:

Usually alerting on things like CPU and memory usage is not all that useful; but being able to drill down and see it is. Imagine you’re paged in the middle of the night because the CPU usage is pinned at ~100%. Great. What is the observable effect? You don’t know. Instead if we alert on consumer lag, we’ll immediately know that our consumers are not keeping up, if it then turns out to be due to CPU usage we’ll probably just scale our infra and go back to sleep.

Cloud storage

There are a lot of alternatives for durable and highly available storage. Each cloud provider have their preferred solution, like AWS S3 or Google Cloud Storage.

There are other solutions available, like attaching network drives to compute instances. Doing this might be necessary when building a stateful service or hosting database on a compute instance.

Something to keep in mind is the latencies every programmer should know.

You don’t have to know it by heart, but sometimes it can really aid in estimating the latency of your solution.

In closing

We’ve discussed the different interviews, what interviewers look for, and examples to help you prepare yourself. I hope this post has given you some insight into the interviewing process, and perhaps helped you realize what you need to hone in order to present your best self.

– Felix

Thanks to Filipe Cristóvão for helpfully reviewing drafts of this post. Much like a distributed system, this post will be eventually consistent thanks to him.

  1. Regarding vulnerability, I cannot recommend enough that you pick up Daring Greatly by Brené Brown.↩︎

  2. Naturally, during COVID-19 both parts of the interview process would be remote.↩︎

  3. As opposed to Google and Facebook where the challenge was indeed a Cracking the Coding Interview type challenge.↩︎

  4. None of these are the actual questions I’ve been asked, or I’ve given. However, the themes of them should be enough for you to gauge the sort of challenges.↩︎

  5. One of the best pieces of advice I ever received was not to focus on eliminating my weaknesses, but to lean into my strengths.↩︎

  6. Given that no new state updates occur, a system that is eventually consistent will at some point reach an equilibrium where all accesses to its data return the same value. For example, in database systems, read replicas might not be up to date with the main database but given time, and no updates – they will all contain the same data.↩︎

  7. Service Level Objective, an objective the service must meet in order to fulfill its agreement with partners. Typically an externally facing system will have an SLO on e.g. availability and latency.↩︎