Start by clarifying requirements and constraints (e.g., number of clients, latency, offline support). Then propose a CRDT-based approach (e.g., RGA for text) to ensure eventual consistency, explaining how it integrates with existing features like undo/redo and autocomplete. Finally, discuss trade-offs (e.g., CRDT vs OT) and how to handle out-of-order operations and convergence.
Pro tip: Demonstrate awareness of real-world complexities: mention that CRDTs can have metadata overhead and that undo/redo in a collaborative context requires careful design (e.g., selective undo). Also, highlight that autocomplete rankings may need to be eventually consistent or computed locally.
Ask about expected number of concurrent users, latency requirements, offline support, and whether the editor is peer-to-peer or server-mediated. This shapes the choice of algorithm and architecture.
Decide between Operational Transformation (OT) and Conflict-free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs). For out-of-order operations and eventual convergence, CRDTs like RGA or Logoot are often simpler to reason about.
Represent the document as a sequence of characters with unique identifiers (e.g., timestamps, site IDs). Define insert/delete operations that can be applied in any order and still converge.
Adapt undo/redo to work with CRDTs (e.g., using selective undo or inverse operations). For autocomplete, either compute rankings locally from the converged document or use a separate eventually consistent service.
Discuss metadata overhead, garbage collection, and performance. Consider network partitions, offline editing, and how to handle conflicts in autocomplete rankings.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.