← Amazon Interview Insights

Amazon·Data Scientist·Technical Phone Screen·Senior

Senior
May 2026

Summary

SQL-heavy technical screen for a Data Scientist role at Amazon. The whole session was basically one big window function problem with a follow-up on indexing strategy, which I did not expect to go as deep as it did.

Questions Asked (3)

Q1

Given an orders table with 100M+ rows, write a SQL query using window functions to find, for each calendar date (UTC), all merchant(s) whose completed order was the very first of that date across all merchants. Return the date, order_id, merchant_id, and order_ts. If multiple orders share the exact earliest timestamp, return all of them. Do not use correlated subqueries.

Data ModelingAlgorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This is the kind of question where you know the shape of the answer immediately but the details trip you up.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use a window function like ROW_NUMBER() or RANK() partitioned by the UTC date of order_ts and ordered by order_ts ascending to identify the earliest completed order(s) per day. Filter for completed orders and select rows where the rank equals 1, ensuring ties are included. Emphasize that this avoids correlated subqueries and scales well with proper indexing and partitioning.

Pro tip: Mention that partitioning the table by date and clustering by order_ts can drastically reduce the data scanned, and that using RANK() instead of ROW_NUMBER() correctly handles ties without extra logic.

1. Clarify requirements and edge cases

Confirm that 'completed order' means status = 'completed', and that the date is derived from order_ts in UTC. Discuss tie-handling: if multiple orders share the exact earliest timestamp, all should be returned.

2. Choose the right window function

Select RANK() (or DENSE_RANK()) over ROW_NUMBER() because it assigns the same rank to ties, ensuring all earliest orders are captured. Partition by the UTC date and order by order_ts ascending.

3. Write the SQL query

Construct a subquery or CTE that computes the rank for each completed order, then filter for rank = 1 in the outer query. Select date, order_id, merchant_id, and order_ts.

4. Optimize for scale

Suggest partitioning the table by date and clustering by order_ts to enable partition pruning and efficient sorting. Mention that window functions can leverage sorted data and that indexes on (status, order_ts) may help.

5. Validate and discuss trade-offs

Test the query on a sample and explain why this approach avoids correlated subqueries and performs well on large datasets. Discuss potential alternatives and their trade-offs.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use of RANK() or DENSE_RANK() to handle ties correctly, unlike ROW_NUMBER().
  • Partitioning by DATE(order_ts) to group orders by calendar date in UTC.
  • Filtering for completed orders before applying the window function to reduce data processed.
  • Avoiding correlated subqueries by using window functions, which are more efficient for large datasets.
  • Performance considerations: partitioning, clustering, and indexing strategies for 100M+ rows.
  • Ensuring UTC date extraction is correct (e.g., using DATE_TRUNC or CAST to date).

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

Q2

Now write a second query: for each merchant and date combination, return that merchant's first completed order of that date.

Data ModelingTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Much more straightforward once you've done part A.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the schema and definitions (e.g., what constitutes a 'completed' order and how to identify the 'first' one). Then, outline a SQL query using a window function like ROW_NUMBER() partitioned by merchant and date, ordered by order timestamp, and filter for completed orders. Finally, discuss trade-offs such as performance, edge cases, and alternative approaches.

Pro tip: Mention that you would confirm whether 'first' means earliest by order creation time or completion time, as this ambiguity could lead to incorrect results. Also, highlight the importance of handling ties or duplicate timestamps to ensure deterministic output.

1. Clarify requirements and schema

Ask questions to understand the table structure, what 'completed' means (e.g., status = 'completed'), and how to determine the 'first' order (e.g., by order timestamp). Confirm the granularity of merchant and date.

2. Design the query logic

Use a window function like ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY merchant_id, order_date ORDER BY order_timestamp) to rank orders within each merchant-date group. Filter for completed orders before ranking.

3. Write the SQL query

Construct the query with a subquery or CTE that assigns row numbers, then select rows where row_number = 1. Ensure proper filtering for completed status and correct date extraction.

4. Discuss trade-offs and edge cases

Address performance considerations (e.g., indexing on merchant_id, order_date, status), handling ties (e.g., using additional tiebreaker like order_id), and alternative approaches (e.g., self-join with MIN).

5. Validate and test

Mention how you would test the query with sample data, including edge cases like no completed orders, multiple orders with same timestamp, and timezone considerations for date extraction.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use of window functions (ROW_NUMBER, RANK, DENSE_RANK) for ranking within groups
  • Filtering for completed orders before ranking to ensure correct first completed order
  • Handling ties in order timestamps (e.g., using order_id as tiebreaker)
  • Performance implications and indexing strategies
  • Date extraction and timezone considerations
  • Alternative approaches like self-join with MIN and their trade-offs

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

Q3

Justify your partitioning and sorting choices, and describe what indexes you would add to support these queries at scale.

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Blanked for a second on the index part.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the query patterns and data scale, then justify partitioning and sorting choices based on access patterns and data distribution. Explain how indexes (e.g., composite, covering) support these queries, and discuss trade-offs like write overhead and storage.

Pro tip: Tie your choices to Amazon's leadership principles: insist on the highest standards by quantifying performance gains, and think big by designing for 10x scale. Also, mention how you'd monitor and iterate on index usage.

1. Clarify requirements

Ask about query patterns, data volume, latency SLAs, and update frequency to ground your design in real needs.

2. Justify partitioning

Choose partition key based on common filters (e.g., date, customer_id) to enable partition pruning and even data distribution.

3. Justify sorting

Select sort key to optimize range scans and ordering for frequent queries, minimizing expensive sorts.

4. Design indexes

Propose composite indexes covering filter and sort columns, and consider covering indexes to avoid table lookups.

5. Discuss trade-offs

Acknowledge costs: write amplification, storage, maintenance; and suggest monitoring and periodic review.

Key Points to Mention

  • Partition pruning and its impact on query performance
  • Sort key order and its role in range queries and merge joins
  • Composite index column order (equality first, then range)
  • Covering indexes to enable index-only scans
  • Write overhead and storage cost of indexes
  • Monitoring index usage and adapting to changing query patterns

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