← Openai Interview Insights

Openai·Software Engineer·Onsite - System Design / Architecture·Staff

StaffPrefer not to say
May 2026

Summary

System design round at OpenAI for an EM role, basically a deep dive into building something like Slack from scratch. They pushed hard on trade-offs and weren't satisfied with surface-level answers.

Questions Asked (5)

Q1

Design a large-scale messaging system like Slack, starting with direct messages and then extending to channels of varying sizes.

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This took up most of the session.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements and scale (e.g., number of users, messages per day, latency, consistency) before diving into design. Then design direct messaging with a focus on real-time delivery, storage, and consistency, and finally extend to channels by addressing fan-out, ordering, and scalability challenges for varying channel sizes.

Pro tip: Explicitly discuss trade-offs between consistency and availability (e.g., using CAP theorem) and how they affect user experience, such as message ordering and delivery guarantees. Show awareness of operational concerns like monitoring, rate limiting, and cost efficiency.

1. Clarify Requirements and Scale

Ask questions to understand functional and non-functional requirements: number of users, messages per second, latency expectations, consistency needs, and features like read receipts, presence, and search.

2. High-Level Architecture for Direct Messages

Propose a basic architecture: clients connect via WebSocket to a gateway, messages are persisted in a database (e.g., Cassandra for scalability), and delivered via a pub/sub system. Discuss message ordering and delivery guarantees.

3. Extend to Channels

Explain how channels differ: messages are broadcast to many users. Discuss fan-out strategies (e.g., write fan-out vs. read fan-out) and how to handle large channels (e.g., thousands of members) without overwhelming the system.

4. Address Scalability and Trade-offs

Dive into scaling components: partitioning messages by channel or user, using caches for hot data, and handling spikes. Discuss trade-offs like consistency vs. latency, and how to ensure message ordering per channel.

5. Discuss Advanced Features and Operations

Cover additional features like search, notifications, and presence, and how they impact the design. Mention monitoring, rate limiting, and cost optimization.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use of WebSockets for real-time bidirectional communication and fallback to long polling.
  • Data model: messages stored with channel_id, sender_id, timestamp, and content; consider time-series or wide-column databases.
  • Fan-out strategies: for small channels, write fan-out to each member's inbox; for large channels, read fan-out or hybrid approach.
  • Message ordering: use per-channel sequence numbers or timestamps with conflict resolution (e.g., Lamport timestamps).
  • Scalability: sharding by channel_id or user_id, using consistent hashing, and caching frequently accessed messages.
  • Trade-offs: consistency vs. availability (e.g., eventual consistency for message delivery), and latency vs. durability.

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

Q2

How would you handle message delivery differently for small versus very large channels, and what are the trade-offs between push and pull models?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

They kept asking me to commit to a specific threshold.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the requirements and scale, then contrast push and pull models for small vs. large channels, highlighting trade-offs in latency, cost, and complexity. Conclude with a hybrid approach that adapts based on channel size and use case.

Pro tip: Emphasize that the choice isn't binary—real systems often use a hybrid, and the decision should be driven by metrics like fan-out, delivery latency, and infrastructure cost.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about channel sizes, message volume, latency requirements, and delivery guarantees to frame the problem.

2. Define Small vs. Large Channels

Characterize small channels (e.g., <100 users) and large channels (e.g., millions) in terms of fan-out, frequency, and resource usage.

3. Compare Push and Pull Models

Explain how push (server-initiated) and pull (client-initiated) work, and their pros/cons for each channel size.

4. Analyze Trade-offs

Discuss trade-offs: push offers low latency but high server load; pull is scalable but adds latency and client overhead.

5. Propose a Hybrid Solution

Suggest a hybrid approach, such as push for small channels and pull for large, or adaptive strategies based on load.

Key Points to Mention

  • Fan-out and scalability challenges in large channels
  • Latency vs. resource consumption trade-offs
  • Push model: server maintains connections, high cost for many clients
  • Pull model: clients poll, easier to scale but higher latency
  • Hybrid approaches: e.g., long polling, WebSockets, or pub/sub with backpressure
  • Real-world examples: chat apps, notification systems, or social media feeds

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

Q3

How would you design the inbox and notification fanout, especially for users who belong to a large number of channels?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Inbox bloat is a real problem I hadn't thought about deeply before this.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements (scale, latency, consistency, fanout semantics) and then propose a hybrid architecture that separates message ingestion from per-user inbox materialization. For users in many channels, avoid naive fanout-on-write by using a combination of fanout-on-read for high-fanout users and fanout-on-write for low-fanout users, with a notification service that deduplicates and batches. Discuss trade-offs around storage, latency, and cost, and mention how you'd handle real-time delivery and offline users.

Pro tip: Emphasize that the design must handle the 'celebrity problem' gracefully—when a user follows thousands of channels, fanout-on-write becomes prohibitively expensive, so you need a hybrid approach with per-user inboxes that merge precomputed and on-demand content. Also, mention that notifications should be idempotent and respect user preferences to avoid spamming.

1. Clarify Requirements and Constraints

Ask about scale (number of users, channels, messages per second), latency requirements, consistency needs (e.g., can notifications be delayed?), and delivery guarantees (at-least-once, exactly-once). Also clarify what 'inbox' means: is it a feed of messages or a list of notifications?

2. High-Level Architecture

Propose a pipeline: message ingestion -> fanout service -> per-user inbox storage -> notification delivery. Separate the inbox (persistent storage of messages) from notifications (ephemeral alerts). Use a message queue (e.g., Kafka) for ingestion and a distributed store (e.g., Redis, Cassandra) for inboxes.

3. Fanout Strategy: Hybrid Approach

For users in few channels, use fanout-on-write: when a message is posted, push it to each subscriber's inbox. For users in many channels (celebrities), use fanout-on-read: store messages per channel and merge on read. Implement a threshold to switch between strategies based on channel size or user subscription count.

4. Notification Service and Delivery

Design a notification service that consumes from the inbox and sends push/email/SMS. Use batching and deduplication to avoid overwhelming users. Implement rate limiting and user preferences. For real-time delivery, use WebSockets or long polling; for offline users, queue notifications and deliver when they reconnect.

5. Trade-offs and Optimizations

Discuss trade-offs: fanout-on-write gives low read latency but high write cost; fanout-on-read gives low write cost but higher read latency. Optimize with caching, precomputed feeds, and incremental updates. Consider using a graph database for social relationships or a specialized feed service like Twitter's Manhattan.

Key Points to Mention

  • Hybrid fanout (write vs read) to handle high-fanout users efficiently
  • Use of message queues (Kafka) for decoupling and scalability
  • Per-user inbox storage with appropriate data store (Redis for speed, Cassandra for durability)
  • Notification deduplication, batching, and rate limiting to prevent spam
  • Real-time delivery mechanisms (WebSockets, push notifications) and offline handling
  • Trade-offs between latency, storage cost, and consistency; mention eventual consistency

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

Q4

How would you track online presence and support multi-device scenarios, including per-device read state?

System DesignData Modeling
Author's notes

Presence was fine, heartbeat to a presence service, nothing surprising.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements: what 'online presence' means (e.g., real-time activity, last-seen timestamps) and the scale (millions of users, many devices). Then propose a data model that separates user-level presence from per-device read state, using a fast store like Redis for ephemeral presence and a durable store for read positions, and discuss trade-offs around consistency, latency, and cost.

Pro tip: Emphasize idempotency and conflict resolution for read state updates across devices—use per-device monotonic version numbers or timestamps and resolve conflicts with last-write-wins or vector clocks, and mention how you'd handle offline devices syncing later.

1. Clarify requirements and scope

Ask about the definition of online presence (e.g., active now, last seen), expected scale (users, devices per user, QPS), and consistency needs (e.g., is stale presence acceptable?).

2. Design presence tracking

Propose using a fast, ephemeral store (e.g., Redis with TTL) to track user online status, with heartbeats from clients and a pub/sub mechanism to notify interested parties.

3. Model per-device read state

Store read positions per device (e.g., last read message ID or timestamp) in a durable database, keyed by user ID and device ID, and consider using a separate table or document per device.

4. Handle multi-device synchronization

Define how read state updates propagate: when a device reads, update its own state and optionally sync to other devices via push notifications or on next fetch, using versioning to resolve conflicts.

5. Address scalability and trade-offs

Discuss sharding, caching, and consistency trade-offs (e.g., eventual consistency for presence vs. strong consistency for read state), and how to handle offline devices and reconnections.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use Redis with TTL for presence and pub/sub for real-time updates
  • Store per-device read state in a durable store like DynamoDB or Cassandra, keyed by user+device
  • Implement heartbeats and timeouts to detect offline devices
  • Use version numbers or timestamps to resolve conflicts when syncing read state across devices
  • Consider eventual consistency for presence and stronger consistency for read state
  • Handle offline devices by queuing updates and syncing on reconnect

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

Q5

Walk through your approach to message storage, history retrieval, caching, and sharding for a globally distributed messaging system.

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Covered sharding by channel ID, time-series storage for history, and CDN-style caching for static assets.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements: scale (messages per second, storage volume), latency targets, consistency needs, and global distribution. Then propose a layered architecture: a durable, sharded storage layer for messages, a caching layer for hot data, and a retrieval service that handles history queries efficiently. Discuss trade-offs (e.g., consistency vs. availability, cache invalidation, sharding strategies) and justify your choices based on the requirements.

Pro tip: Emphasize how you'd handle message ordering and idempotency across shards, and discuss how you'd evolve the design as scale grows (e.g., from a single region to multi-region).

1. Clarify Requirements and Constraints

Ask about scale (messages per second, total storage), latency requirements, consistency needs (e.g., read-after-write), and global distribution (regions, data residency).

2. Design Message Storage

Choose a storage system (e.g., distributed NoSQL like Cassandra or a custom log-structured store) that can handle high write throughput and scale horizontally. Discuss data model (e.g., message ID, conversation ID, timestamp, payload) and partitioning key (e.g., conversation ID to ensure ordering).

3. Implement History Retrieval

Design an efficient retrieval API that supports pagination and range queries (e.g., by conversation and time). Consider indexing strategies and how to handle large histories without overloading the system.

4. Add Caching Layer

Introduce a cache (e.g., Redis or Memcached) for hot data (recent messages, active conversations). Discuss cache eviction policies, invalidation strategies, and how to handle cache misses without impacting latency.

5. Plan Sharding and Global Distribution

Describe sharding strategy (e.g., consistent hashing on conversation ID) to distribute load and enable horizontal scaling. For global distribution, discuss multi-region replication, data locality, and consistency trade-offs (e.g., eventual consistency vs. strong consistency).

Key Points to Mention

  • Sharding key choice (e.g., conversation ID) to ensure message ordering and even load distribution
  • Storage engine trade-offs (e.g., LSM trees vs. B-trees, SQL vs. NoSQL) for write-heavy workloads
  • Caching strategies (e.g., write-through, write-behind, TTL) and cache invalidation challenges
  • Consistency models (e.g., eventual vs. strong) and their impact on user experience
  • Multi-region replication and conflict resolution (e.g., last-write-wins, CRDTs)
  • Monitoring and scaling: how to detect hotspots and rebalance shards

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