Loading Question...
The first round was an online coding assessment with 3 DSA problems:
The qualifying criteria was 60%.
After qualifying the OA, there was a 16-question pen-and-paper MCQ round covering:
The passing criteria was again 60%.
The next stage was Hackathon Part A. The problem was the same LOCK problem that Juspay has been using for several years. The total score was 300, and a minimum of 60% was required to qualify.
https://leetcode.com/discuss/post/3256916/juspay-tree-of-space-logarithmic-solutio-oknh/
In some cases, there can also be an eliminatory DSA round after Part A, but I did not have this round. Part B was an intensive 8-hour session conducted over Google Meet and Slack with the interviewer.
It started with some basic questions about my resume and projects, followed by a DSA problem based on Coin Change using DP.
We then discussed the code I had written for Part A. The main task was to make the code thread-safe. I had to identify the race conditions, discuss possible solutions with the interviewer, and then implement thread safety.
There were some interesting constraints: mutex locks and built-in mutable synchronization variables could not be used. The synchronization mechanism had to be implemented from scratch. We were asked to assume that reads and writes themselves were atomic.
I also had to explain the solution through a dry run and submit the final implementation before 7 PM.
The final stage was an in-person technical interview. This was a detailed discussion around my resume and projects, including database schema, scalability, architecture, and the design decisions behind my projects.
We also discussed Low-Level Design (LLD) of Zomato, along with some computer networking concepts and questions.
The DSA discussion in this round involved a shortest-path problem with multiple variables.
Overall, the process was quite comprehensive and went beyond just DSA. It tested problem-solving, core CS fundamentals, concurrency, system and low-level design, networking, project understanding, and the ability to explain and defend technical decisions.
Not selected