← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

Intermediate
Apr 2026

Summary

Meta SWE interview with a banking system design problem. The Level 1 API question felt straightforward at first but there were enough edge cases to keep you honest.

Questions Asked (1)

Q1

Implement a basic banking system API with three operations: creating an account, depositing funds, and transferring funds between accounts. Each operation takes a timestamp and must handle invalid inputs by returning appropriate values (False or None).

API & IntegrationsAlgorithms & Data StructuresSystem Design
Author's notes

The create and deposit parts went fine.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements and defining the API contract, including data structures and error handling. Then design the core logic for each operation, ensuring atomicity and timestamp handling. Finally, discuss trade-offs, edge cases, and potential extensions.

Pro tip: Emphasize idempotency and concurrency control, as real banking systems require these to prevent duplicate transactions and race conditions. Mentioning these shows you think beyond basic functionality.

1. Clarify Requirements and API Contract

Ask questions to understand expected inputs, outputs, and constraints (e.g., timestamp format, account ID uniqueness, error handling). Define the API endpoints and their signatures.

2. Design Data Structures and Storage

Choose appropriate data structures (e.g., hash map for accounts) and consider persistence, concurrency, and scalability. Discuss in-memory vs. database-backed storage.

3. Implement Core Operations

Write pseudocode or actual code for createAccount, deposit, and transfer. Ensure each validates inputs, handles timestamps, and returns False/None on errors.

4. Address Edge Cases and Concurrency

Consider scenarios like duplicate account creation, insufficient funds, invalid timestamps, and concurrent transfers. Implement locks or transactions to maintain consistency.

5. Discuss Trade-offs and Extensions

Talk about design decisions (e.g., eventual consistency vs. strong consistency) and potential improvements like audit logs, idempotency keys, or rate limiting.

Key Points to Mention

  • Input validation: check for null/empty values, valid timestamps, and positive amounts.
  • Atomicity in transfers: ensure both debit and credit happen or neither, using transactions or locks.
  • Idempotency: handle duplicate requests with the same timestamp to avoid double-processing.
  • Concurrency control: use locks or optimistic concurrency to prevent race conditions.
  • Error handling: return False or None appropriately and log errors for debugging.
  • Scalability: discuss partitioning, sharding, or using a database for persistence.

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