← Google Interview Insights

Google·Software Engineer·Onsite - Multi Round·Junior

JuniorPrefer not to say
Jun 2026

Summary

Two coding rounds at Google for a software engineer role. The problems leaned graph/DP and matrix manipulation, and while I got through both, neither felt clean. Left with a lot of mixed feelings about how I performed under pressure.

Questions Asked (2)

Q1

Given a 2D grid, determine reachability between nodes using dynamic programming.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

My first approach was just wrong.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the problem first: define the grid (obstacles, movement directions) and what 'reachability' means (e.g., from a start to all cells, or between all pairs). Then choose a DP formulation that builds reachability incrementally, such as propagating reachable states row by row or using BFS/DFS with memoization, and analyze time/space complexity.

Pro tip: Explicitly state your assumptions about movement (4-directional vs 8-directional) and obstacles, and mention that for all-pairs reachability, Floyd-Warshall on the grid graph or repeated BFS may be more appropriate than a simple DP. This shows you understand the problem's nuances and can adapt your approach.

1. Clarify the problem

Ask about grid size, obstacles, allowed moves (4 or 8 directions), and whether reachability is from a single source or between all pairs. Confirm if the grid is static or dynamic.

2. Define the DP state

Decide on a state that captures reachability, e.g., dp[i][j] = true if cell (i,j) is reachable from the start. For all-pairs, consider dp[i][j][k][l] or a transitive closure approach.

3. Establish base cases and transitions

Set base cases (e.g., start cell is reachable). Define transitions based on allowed moves and obstacles, ensuring you handle boundaries and blocked cells.

4. Choose computation order

Determine if the DP can be computed in a single pass (e.g., row-major for right/down moves) or requires iterative relaxation (e.g., Bellman-Ford style) for arbitrary directions. Consider using BFS/DFS with memoization if cycles exist.

5. Analyze complexity and optimize

State time and space complexity. For large grids, discuss optimizations like using bitsets, rolling arrays, or early termination. Mention trade-offs between DP and graph search.

Key Points to Mention

  • Problem clarification: obstacles, movement directions, single-source vs all-pairs
  • DP state definition and recurrence relation
  • Base cases and handling of blocked cells
  • Computation order (topological vs iterative relaxation)
  • Time and space complexity analysis
  • Alternative approaches: BFS/DFS, Floyd-Warshall for all-pairs, union-find for dynamic connectivity

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

Q2

Solve a brute force matrix traversal problem, then optimize it at a micro level beyond asymptotic complexity.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

The interviewer opened by calling it easy, which immediately made me tense up more than any hard problem would.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

First, present a clear brute-force solution for matrix traversal, then systematically optimize it by analyzing memory access patterns, cache behavior, and instruction-level parallelism. Focus on micro-optimizations like loop ordering, blocking, and reducing branch mispredictions, while explaining the trade-offs.

Pro tip: Demonstrate awareness that asymptotic complexity is not the only factor in performance; mention specific hardware details like cache line size and prefetching to show depth. Also, be prepared to discuss how you would measure and validate improvements using profiling tools.

1. Clarify the problem and constraints

Ask questions to understand the matrix dimensions, traversal order, memory layout, and performance goals. Confirm whether the matrix is stored in row-major or column-major order.

2. Present brute-force solution

Write a straightforward nested loop traversal, analyze its time and space complexity, and identify potential inefficiencies.

3. Identify micro-optimization opportunities

Discuss cache locality, loop interchange, blocking, and vectorization. Explain how each can improve performance without changing asymptotic complexity.

4. Implement and compare optimized versions

Show code for optimized traversal (e.g., loop reordering for row-major access) and reason about expected speedup. Mention profiling to validate.

5. Discuss trade-offs and limitations

Address when micro-optimizations are worth it, potential downsides like code complexity, and how to decide based on profiling data.

Key Points to Mention

  • Cache locality and memory access patterns (row-major vs. column-major traversal)
  • Loop interchange and blocking techniques to improve cache hit rates
  • Vectorization and SIMD instructions for parallel data processing
  • Branch prediction and reducing conditional checks inside loops
  • Profiling tools (e.g., perf, VTune) to measure performance and guide optimizations
  • Trade-offs between readability, maintainability, and performance

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