← Anthropic Interview Insights
The core idea clicked fast: store each key's history as a sorted list of (timestamp, value) pairs and binary search on GET.
Start by clarifying requirements: keys are strings, values can be any type, timestamps are monotonically increasing per key? Then propose a design where each key maps to a time-ordered data structure (e.g., balanced BST or sorted array) storing (timestamp, value) pairs. For GET, perform binary search to find the largest timestamp ≤ query timestamp, achieving O(log n) time.
Pro tip: Mention that if timestamps are monotonically increasing per key, you can append to a dynamic array and still binary search in O(log n), but if out-of-order writes are possible, a balanced BST or skip list is needed. Also discuss memory trade-offs and potential for versioning/compaction.
Ask about timestamp ordering, concurrency, persistence, and whether values can be deleted. Confirm that GET must be O(log n) in the number of writes for that key.
For each key, maintain a collection of (timestamp, value) pairs sorted by timestamp. Options: balanced BST (e.g., red-black tree), skip list, or sorted array if writes are append-only.
Insert the new (timestamp, value) into the per-key structure. If timestamps are unique per key, handle duplicates by overwriting or keeping latest. Ensure insertion maintains sorted order.
Binary search for the largest timestamp ≤ query timestamp. Return the associated value. If none exists, return null or a sentinel.
GET is O(log n) due to binary search. SET is O(log n) for BST/skip list, O(1) amortized for append-only array. Discuss memory overhead and potential optimizations like compaction.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.