Katkat

Company

Attentive interview questions

16 practice questions in the style of Attentive's interviews, covering System Design, Software Engineering Fundamentals, Coding & Algorithms, Behavioral & Leadership.

Questions16

0 easy14 medium2 hard

Your progress0/16

Attentive interview questions by the numbers

Last updated

Katkat has 16 Attentive interview questions. The largest topics are System Design (63%), Coding & Algorithms (25%) and Behavioral & Leadership (6%). By difficulty: 88% medium and 13% hard. The most common round is Onsite (56%). Frequent concepts include System Design, Data Modeling, stack and algorithms.

Difficulty

  • Medium88% · 14
  • Hard13% · 2

Interview rounds

  • Onsite56% · 9
  • Technical Screen44% · 7

Roles

  • Software Engineer94% · 15
  • Data Scientist6% · 1

Frequent concepts

  • System Design19% · 3
  • Data Modeling13% · 2
  • stack13% · 2
  • algorithms6% · 1
  • caching6% · 1
  • Caching6% · 1

Showing 1–16 of 16 results

  • This question evaluates a candidate’s ability to design scalable, reliable broadcast and scheduling systems, covering API design, data modeling, distributed scheduling, delivery semantics, idempotency, retries, and operational fault-tolerance.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignTechnical Screen
  • This question evaluates debugging and root-cause analysis, memory management, streaming/chunked data processing (including correctness across chunk boundaries), and system reliability aspects such as observability, testing, and recovery for large-input backends.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignTechnical Screen
  • This problem tests the ability to design a time-series storage system by balancing read/write throughput, data retention policies, and query performance at scale.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignTechnical Screen
  • Design a service that pulls and syncs data from a third-party API that enforces a hard limit of 3 requests per second. It tests global rate limiting across distributed workers, retry and backoff behavior, incremental sync with checkpoints, and prioritizing work when demand exceeds the request budget.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignTechnical Screen
  • A system design exercise to build an event analytics system that ingests very high-volume, concurrent event streams from Kafka and stores them for long-term analysis. It tests Kafka topics, partitions, consumers and consumer groups, delivery guarantees, and durable, queryable storage design.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • A system design question about a product catalog built from full retailer snapshot files, with 50,000 retailers, 11,000 read queries per second and a 400 ms latency target. It tests snapshot diffing, recovery from a mistaken upload, admin overrides that survive retailer updates, scaling ingestion, and observability.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • Design a real-time ad serving system that picks an eligible ad for each ad request, returns it within a tight latency budget, and records impressions and clicks for billing. Tests candidate retrieval and ranking, campaign data freshness, budget enforcement across many servers, and a deduplicated event pipeline.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • Design an extensible, resilient data ingestion service capable of extracting data from heterogeneous third-party APIs while managing rate limits, pagination state, schema drift, and fault recovery.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • Design a high-throughput, read-heavy catalog service supporting draft/publish lifecycles, item versioning, search projections, and resilient rollback mechanisms.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • Design a multi-tenant product catalog ingestion and serving system that processes periodic, complete merchant snapshots while deterministically layering administrator overrides, supporting atomic cutovers, and maintaining read consistency.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSystem DesignOnsite
  • Implement an evaluator for a small Lisp-style prefix language with ADD and MULT, then extend it with LET variable bindings. It tests recursive parsing of nested expressions, settling ambiguous language rules before coding, and choosing a data structure for nested variable scopes.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerSoftware Engineering FundamentalsOnsite
  • Implement a recursive descent or token-based interpreter to evaluate a scoped, Lisp-like arithmetic expression supporting addition, multiplication, and sequential variable bindings with shadowing.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerCoding & AlgorithmsOnsite
  • This question evaluates a data scientist's product analytics and leadership competencies, including end-to-end decision ownership, prioritization of product metrics, communicating trade-offs between statistical rigor and speed, and influencing stakeholders within a B2B mobile messaging context that has compliance and deliverability constraints.

    AttentiveData ScientistBehavioral & LeadershipTechnical Screen
  • Given log timestamps sorted in non-decreasing order with possible duplicates, answer many inclusive time-window queries by returning the first and last index of the entries inside each window, where a window may extend past the data's time range. It tests O(log n) per-query boundary searches on sorted data with duplicate keys.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerCoding & AlgorithmsTechnical Screen
  • Implement a linear-time string reduction algorithm that repeatedly eliminates adjacent runs of k identical characters using a stack.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerCoding & AlgorithmsTechnical Screen
  • Given an in-memory log sorted by integer timestamp, return every entry whose timestamp lies within an inclusive start and end time. The problem tests exact boundary handling with duplicate timestamps, empty results when the range misses the log, and locating a range efficiently in sorted data.

    AttentiveSoftware EngineerCoding & AlgorithmsOnsite

Attentive interview experiences

All 8 →
  • Back-to-Back Phone Screens, Binary Search on Logs and a 3 Requests/Second API LimitAttentive · Software Engineer · Technical Screen · Sep 2026

    I had two phone screens back to back. Coding: binary search on logs, a variant of a problem that is already on the forum. The twist is that the log timestamps can be duplicated, and the time window I have to return is all inclusive, [start, end]. Also, start and end can fall outside the time range of the current dataset. System design: it was kind of like pulling data from a third party, and I fi…

  • Leveled Up to Senior Bar, Rejected After a Messy System DesignAttentive · Software Engineer · Onsite · Sep 2026
    Rejected

    I applied for SWE II. HR call - 2026-08-26 The questions were: How much do you know about Attentive? Are you actively interviewing right now? Do you have any offer deadlines? Do you need sponsorship? What are the compensation range you are targeting? Then they asked me to introduce myself. Are you able to talk about a feature or product that you work on like end-to-end or a zero-to-one product? W…

  • Two Onsite Rounds and an Unexpected Catalog DesignAttentive · Software Engineer · Onsite · Sep 2026
    Rejected

    I was contacted and invited to an onsite. Round 1 combined coding and system design. Round 2 included coding, system design, and behavioral questions. I felt that my system design and behavioral performance in Round 2 was poor, and I was ultimately rejected. There were not many interview reports about this company, so I summarized everything I could find. All the questions I received turned out t…

  • After a recruiter screening, I had a managerial round. I received the job description, but the details about the structure and expectations turned out to be wrong. Before the questions even began, the interaction felt uncomfortable because the tone did not feel respectful. The conversation came across as skeptical and dismissive. My answers were treated as though they had been discounted from the…

  • I started with an initial phone screen. After that, I expected a fairly standard sequence: a second round with coding and system design, a third round with more of the same assessment, and then a meeting with the team. The role closed before the process could get that far, so I never reached those later rounds. It left me feeling as though the interview process was just about to expand, and then…

More companies