← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Software Engineer·Onsite - System Design / Architecture·Senior

SeniorPrefer not to say
Apr 2026

Summary

Meta SWE onsite design round. The whole session was basically one massive object-oriented system design problem disguised as a coding question. Way more edge cases than I expected going in.

Questions Asked (1)

Q1

Design and implement a BankSystem class from scratch that supports creating accounts, depositing funds, making payments between accounts, initiating transfers with holds, accepting transfers within an expiry window, and merging customer identities. Walk through your data models, API return values, error handling, and the time/space complexity of each operation.

System DesignData ModelingAlgorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

This one ate the entire interview.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements and defining the core data models (Account, Customer, Transfer) with their relationships and state transitions. Then, walk through each operation, specifying the API contract, error cases, and complexity, while highlighting design trade-offs and optimizations.

Pro tip: Emphasize idempotency and atomicity for financial operations, and discuss how you would handle concurrency and consistency in a real system, even if the implementation is single-threaded.

1. Clarify Requirements and Scope

Ask clarifying questions about expected scale, concurrency, persistence, and exact semantics of operations like transfers and merges. Confirm assumptions before diving into design.

2. Define Data Models and Invariants

Specify the fields and relationships for Account, Customer, and Transfer, including state (e.g., pending, accepted, expired) and invariants like non-negative balances. Explain how merging customers affects account ownership.

3. Design API and Error Handling

For each operation, define input parameters, return values (e.g., success/failure, transaction IDs), and error conditions (e.g., insufficient funds, duplicate transfer, expired hold). Discuss idempotency keys for safety.

4. Analyze Complexity and Optimizations

State the time and space complexity for each operation, assuming appropriate data structures (e.g., hash maps for O(1) lookups). Mention potential optimizations like indexing or caching for high throughput.

5. Discuss Trade-offs and Extensions

Highlight design trade-offs (e.g., consistency vs. availability) and how you would extend the system for concurrency, persistence, or distributed deployment.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use of unique identifiers for accounts, customers, and transfers to ensure traceability and idempotency.
  • State management for transfers: pending, accepted, expired, with expiry timestamps and background cleanup.
  • Atomicity and consistency: ensure deposits, payments, and transfers are atomic; discuss locking or optimistic concurrency.
  • Error handling: return meaningful error codes/messages for invalid operations, insufficient funds, duplicate requests, etc.
  • Complexity analysis: O(1) for account creation, deposit, payment, and transfer initiation/acceptance with hash maps; O(n) for merging customers if combining account lists.
  • Merging customers: reassign accounts, handle conflicts, and ensure no orphaned accounts; consider union-find for efficient merges.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.