← Tradedesk Interview Insights
The ownership check on compress was fine, that part clicked fast.
Start by clarifying the requirements and constraints, especially around file ownership, atomicity, and error handling. Then outline a design that separates the compression/decompression logic from the file system operations, ensuring that all preconditions are checked before any modifications. Finally, discuss potential edge cases and trade-offs, such as partial failures and concurrency.
Pro tip: Emphasize the importance of atomic operations and proper error handling to prevent data corruption, and mention that you would use temporary files and atomic renames to ensure consistency.
Ask questions to understand the expected behavior: What does 'halves its size' mean? Is it exactly half? What about file ownership checks? Should operations be atomic? Are there concurrency concerns?
Outline the steps: check if the caller owns the file, verify the file exists and is not already compressed, create a new file with '.COMPRESSED' suffix, write half the data (or apply a compression algorithm), and atomically replace the original if needed.
Outline the steps: check if the file has the '.COMPRESSED' suffix, verify the caller owns it, check for filename collision (the target filename without suffix), ensure there is enough disk capacity, then write the decompressed data and remove the compressed file.
Discuss how to handle errors such as permission denied, file not found, insufficient disk space, and partial writes. Mention the use of temporary files and atomic operations to avoid corruption.
Consider trade-offs between simplicity and robustness, e.g., using a real compression algorithm vs. simply halving the size, and the impact on performance and disk usage.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.