A Software Engineer at EDB plays a pivotal role in shaping the future of database technology. As a company deeply rooted in the open-source ecosystem, EDB relies on its engineers to build, maintain, and scale high-performance database solutions that empower organizations to manage mission-critical data. You will be at the intersection of complex systems architecture and practical software delivery, ensuring that our products remain robust, secure, and performant. Your impact extends beyond writing code; you will contribute to the evolution of database management systems that support enterprise-scale applications. Whether you are optimizing query engines, improving database reliability, or integrating cloud-native features, your work directly influences how our global customers handle massive datasets. This role is ideal for engineers who thrive on technical depth, value the transparency of open-source, and are eager to solve challenging problems in distributed systems and infrastructure.
Initial Screening
reportedThe process begins with an initial screening to assess basic qualifications.
What to demonstrate
- The process begins with an initial screening to assess basic qualifications
- Depth in System Design
How to prepare
- Be able to walk your CV end to end in two minutes, and say why this company specifically.
- Have your salary expectations, notice period and location constraints ready, and ask for the rest of the loop in writing.
Technical Screens
reportedCandidates undergo technical screens to evaluate their technical competence.
What to demonstrate
- Candidates undergo technical screens to evaluate their technical competence
- Depth in System Design
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: What are the common challenges when scaling a distributed system?
- Answer aloud and timed: Can you explain the utility of CRDs (Custom Resource Definitions) in the context of our product?
Deep-Dive Technical Discussions
reportedIn-depth discussions focused on technical skills and problem-solving abilities.
What to demonstrate
- In-depth discussions focused on technical skills and problem-solving abilities
- Depth in System Design
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you approach debugging a memory leak in a large-scale application?
- Answer aloud and timed: How would you design a system to handle high-write throughput?
Behavioral Rounds
reportedBehavioral interviews with various levels of management to assess cultural fit.
What to demonstrate
- Behavioral interviews with various levels of management to assess cultural fit
- Depth in System Design
How to prepare
- Prepare three examples from your own work, each with a decision you made and an outcome you can quantify.
- Re-read the description of the behavioral rounds above and write down what you would ask to confirm before it.
Final Leadership Interviews
reportedFinal interviews with leadership to evaluate overall fit and potential.
What to demonstrate
- Final interviews with leadership to evaluate overall fit and potential
- Depth in System Design
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: What considerations do you make when choosing between different storage engines?
- Answer aloud and timed: Describe a time you had to communicate a complex technical decision to a non-technical stakeholder.
PracHub editorial advice for the preparation topics above.
Own your experience
Be ready to deep-dive into every project listed on your CV. If you don't know the implementation details, don't list it.
Ask meaningful questions
Use the time at the end of your interviews to ask about the team's biggest technical challenges or how they balance innovation with stability.
Stay professional
The interview process is an extension of the workplace. Maintain clear and consistent communication with your recruiter throughout.
Study the fundamentals
Re-read classic database and systems engineering literature. The basics often form the foundation of our most complex architectural discussions.
Choose a category, try a prompt, then open its approach, worked solution or follow-up when you need it.
How do you manage database performance in a high-concurrency environment?
How do you manage database performance in a high-concurrency environment?
Approach
- Say what the runtime actually does before reasoning about the code.
- Name what is shared across threads and what owns each piece of state.
- Identify the window where an invariant is briefly untrue.
- Distinguish a value from a reference to it, and say which one you handed out.
Follow-up
- What happens if two callers reach this at the same time?
- Where could this allocate more than you expect?
Find overlapping job attempts and peak concurrency from lease records
A day of job_run history yields about 50,000,000 attempt records: (job_run_id, job_type, attempt, started_at, finished_at which is NULL when the worker died, lease_expires_at). Leases expire on a clock, so a job that outran its lease ran twice. Produce (a) every job_run_id whose attempts overlapped in wall-clock time and (b) the peak number of simultaneously running attempts per job_type with the minute it occurred. Target O(n log n). State how you treat a NULL finished_at and what clock skew does to your answer.
Approach
- Define the interval before sorting anything: an attempt occupies [started_at, COALESCE(finished_at, lease_expires_at)). finished_at is observed and lease_expires_at is only a promise, so every attempt without a finish contributes an estimate and the whole result is a lower bound on overlap rather than an exact count.
- For peak concurrency, sweep: emit 2n endpoints, sort by (timestamp, kind) with ends ordered before starts at equal timestamps, then walk the sequence maintaining a counter per job_type and record each type's maximum with its timestamp. O(n log n) dominated by the sort, O(n) space, or O(1) extra if the sort is external and the walk streams.
- For overlap detection, do not compare attempts pairwise. A single global sort by (job_run_id, started_at) gives both the grouping and the order; within a group, keep the maximum end seen so far and report an overlap exactly when the next start is less than that running maximum, which is one linear pass after the sort.
- Half-open intervals matter and are easy to get wrong: with closed intervals an attempt ending at the same millisecond another begins reads as concurrency two, and across 50,000,000 records that artefact swamps the real signal.
Follow-up
- A handler is not idempotent and you have found 400 overlapping jobs. Which of them actually caused damage, and what would you query to find out?
- Peak concurrency for one job_type is 4 against a configured cap of 4. Is the cap working, or is the data hiding attempts that never started?
Canonicalise a request body into a stable idempotency fingerprint
idempotency_key.request_fingerprint is a SHA-256 over the method, path and canonicalised body, and a retry whose fingerprint differs must be rejected with 422 rather than served the stored response. Write the canonicaliser. Bodies are JSON up to 256 KB nested at most 32 levels; clients vary key order, whitespace and unicode escaping, and some send 64-bit ids as JSON numbers. Produce a deterministic byte string such that semantically identical bodies match and any semantic difference does not. State your complexity and name two normalisations you refuse to perform.
Approach
- Parse once into a tree, then re-serialise under fixed rules: object keys sorted, array order preserved, one escaping convention, no insignificant whitespace. Parsing is O(n) and sorting keys is O(k log k) per object, so O(n log n) overall with O(depth) stack, and the 32-level cap is enforced during parsing because hostile nesting is how a canonicaliser becomes a stack overflow.
- Sort keys by their UTF-8 bytes and say why the obvious implementation is wrong in some runtimes: a default string comparison that orders by UTF-16 code units places surrogate pairs, meaning code points from U+10000 up, below U+E000 to U+FFFF, which is not UTF-8 byte order, so two services written in different languages disagree on the same document.
- Do not re-encode numbers through a double. IEEE-754 binary64 represents integers exactly only up to 2^53, so normalising a 19-digit id through a float changes it, and 1 against 1.0 cannot be reconciled without deciding whether they are the same value. Preserve the literal token, and require ids as strings at the API boundary if you want them comparable.
- Reject duplicate keys rather than picking one. JSON permits them and parsers disagree, most keeping the last, so any choice you make ties the fingerprint to a parser detail that the code handling the request does not necessarily share.
Follow-up
- A client sends the same logical request with an extra field your API ignores. Same key, different fingerprint, so you return 422. Is that the right answer?
- Where does the fingerprint get computed relative to request decompression and the body-size limit?
Find version gaps and relay lag with window functions
outbox_event holds event_id, aggregate_type, aggregate_id, aggregate_version, event_type, payload, status ('pending','published','dead'), attempts, created_at, published_at. A projection is missing rows and you must decide whether the relay skipped events or the consumer dropped them. Write three queries over the last seven days: one listing every aggregate_id whose published aggregate_version sequence has a hole, one giving per-day counts with a running total, and one returning the newest published event per aggregate. For each, say where the window function is evaluated relative to WHERE and LIMIT. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Gaps: compute lead(aggregate_version) OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version) in a subquery, then filter next_version <> aggregate_version + 1 in the outer query. Window functions are evaluated after WHERE, GROUP BY and HAVING and before the outer ORDER BY and LIMIT, so the predicate cannot sit in the same WHERE clause and PostgreSQL 16 has no QUALIFY.
- Say what the seven-day filter does to the answer: it truncates every partition, so the first row per aggregate has no predecessor inside the window and a hole spanning the boundary is invisible. Widen the window, or join to resource.version as the authority for the true maximum.
- Running total: SELECT date_trunc('day', created_at) AS d, count() AS n, sum(count()) OVER (ORDER BY date_trunc('day', created_at) ROWS UNBOUNDED PRECEDING). An aggregate inside a window call is legal because grouping runs before windowing. The grouping key is unique per row here so ROWS and RANGE agree, but write the frame anyway — over ungrouped rows with tied timestamps the default RANGE frame pulls in every peer row and the total jumps.
- Newest per aggregate: DISTINCT ON (aggregate_id) ... ORDER BY aggregate_id, aggregate_version DESC is the cheap PostgreSQL-only form when an index matches that order; row_number() OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version DESC) = 1 is the portable form and needs a subquery for the same evaluation-order reason as the gap query.
Follow-up
- Relay failover redelivers events. Does a duplicate break the gap query, and how would you detect one from this table alone?
- Turn the gap check into a continuous monitor rather than a query someone runs after an incident. What does it watch?
Replace offset paging on the resource feed with keyset
resource holds resource_id, tenant_id, owner_user_id, title, body_ref, version, status ('draft','active','archived','deleted'), created_at, updated_at, deleted_at, with an index on (tenant_id, status, updated_at DESC, resource_id DESC). The listing endpoint returns active resources for one tenant, newest update first, 50 per page, today with LIMIT 50 OFFSET n. Tenants reach page 400 and rows are created while they read. Write the keyset query, define what the cursor carries and how it is encoded, and say which part of the index each predicate uses. Assume PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Name the two failures separately. OFFSET 20000 makes the server produce and discard 20,000 rows, so page cost grows with depth rather than with page size. Independently, any write that changes how many rows sort above the offset moves the window between two fetches, and the direction decides which anomaly you get: an insert lands at the head of updated_at DESC and pushes already-returned rows down past the boundary, so they are returned a second time; a delete above the offset, or a row whose updated_at is bumped above the cursor, pulls rows up and one is never returned at all. Nothing in the response reveals either.
- Write the seek: WHERE tenant_id = $1 AND status = 'active' AND (updated_at, resource_id) < ($2, $3) ORDER BY updated_at DESC, resource_id DESC LIMIT 50. The row-value comparison is one index range rather than a disjunction, and both columns are NOT NULL, which is what makes that comparison well defined.
- Map each predicate onto the index: tenant_id and status are equality on the leading columns, (updated_at, resource_id) is the range, and the ORDER BY matches the index order so no Sort node appears and the scan stops after 50 rows. The DESC in the definition only matters for mixed directions — a plain ascending btree on the same columns is read backwards for this query.
- Put both sort columns in the cursor and nothing the client can tamper with into another tenant: base64 of (updated_at, resource_id), validated server-side, with tenant_id taken from the principal.
Follow-up
- The client asks for 'jump to page 400'. What do you offer instead, and what does the honest version cost?
- Sort order becomes user-selectable across four columns. How many indexes is that, and which would you refuse to add?
Explain how a specific function in a codebase returns a certain type of value and why.
Explain how a specific function in a codebase returns a certain type of value and why.
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
What are the common challenges when scaling a distributed system?
What are the common challenges when scaling a distributed system?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
Can you explain the utility of CRDs (Custom Resource Definitions) in the context of our product?
Can you explain the utility of CRDs (Custom Resource Definitions) in the context of our product?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
How would you design a system to handle high-write throughput?
How would you design a system to handle high-write throughput?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
Explain the trade-offs between different consistency models in a distributed database.
Explain the trade-offs between different consistency models in a distributed database.
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
How do you ensure code maintainability when working on a long-term, evolving codebase?
How do you ensure code maintainability when working on a long-term, evolving codebase?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
What considerations do you make when choosing between different storage engines?
What considerations do you make when choosing between different storage engines?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
How do you approach debugging a memory leak in a large-scale application?
How do you approach debugging a memory leak in a large-scale application?
Approach
- Establish what changed and when, before forming any theory.
- Pick a bisection that eliminates candidates whichever way it turns out.
- Check the instrumentation before believing the symptom.
- Separate the trigger from the cause; the deploy is rarely the bug.
Follow-up
- What would you look at first, and what would it rule out?
- How would you tell a cause from a coincidence here?
Built from the rounds and topics EDB candidates report.
Prepare, practise & reflect
One practical outcome each day. Spend longer where you need it.
0 / 7 done01Map the EDB loop
- Write out the reported sequence: Initial Screening, Technical Screens, Deep-Dive Technical Discussions, Behavioral Rounds, Final Leadership Interviews.
- For each round, write one sentence on what it is judging, from the description above, and mark the one you are least ready for.
Deliverable: A one-page map of the 5 reported rounds, with the weakest marked.
02Work System Design
- Spend the session on System Design, which EDB candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in System Design and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in System Design.
03Work Scalability
- Spend the session on Scalability, which EDB candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Scalability and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Scalability.
04Work Trade-offs in Architecture
- Spend the session on Trade-offs in Architecture, which EDB candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Trade-offs in Architecture and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Trade-offs in Architecture.
05Answer out loud: Technical & Domain Expertise
- Answer aloud, timed: Explain how a specific function in a codebase returns a certain type of value and why.
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you manage database performance in a high-concurrency environment?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Technical & Domain Expertise question(s), under time.
06Answer out loud: System Design & Architecture
- Answer aloud, timed: How would you design a system to handle high-write throughput?
- Answer aloud, timed: Explain the trade-offs between different consistency models in a distributed database.
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported System Design & Architecture question(s), under time.
07Answer out loud: Behavioral & Communication
- Answer aloud, timed: Describe a time you had to communicate a complex technical decision to a non-technical stakeholder.
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you handle disagreements regarding architectural choices within your team?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Behavioral & Communication question(s), under time.
Expand any day for tasks and deliverables. Your progress is saved on this device.
Behavioural rounds judge the decision you made and what it cost.
Describe a time you had to communicate a complex technical decision to a non-technical stakeholder.
Describe a time you had to communicate a complex technical decision to a non-technical stakeholder.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
How do you handle disagreements regarding architectural choices within your team?
How do you handle disagreements regarding architectural choices within your team?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Tell us about a time you had to onboard to a new, complex project.
Tell us about a time you had to onboard to a new, complex project.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
How do you prioritize tasks when dealing with competing deadlines?
How do you prioritize tasks when dealing with competing deadlines?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
- 01
Describe a time you had to communicate a complex technical decision to a non-technical stakeholder.
- 02
How do you handle disagreements regarding architectural choices within your team?
- 03
Tell us about a time you had to onboard to a new, complex project.
- 04
How do you prioritize tasks when dealing with competing deadlines?
How long does the interview process typically take?
The process usually spans 3 to 6 weeks, depending on team availability and the number of interview rounds.
EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What is the best way to prepare for the technical assignment?
Focus on clean, readable code and robust error handling. Ensure your submission is well-documented, as reviewers look for your ability to explain your design decisions.
EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Does EDB value open-source contributions?
Yes, but be prepared to talk about the technical implementation of your contributions. Simply having a GitHub profile is not enough; you must be ready to explain the "why" behind your code.
EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What is the culture like at EDB?
It is a highly technical, collaborative, and professional environment. You will work with experts who value deep, thoughtful analysis over quick, superficial fixes.
EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What topics does EDB test in interviews?
EDB interviews most often cover PostgreSQL, Behavioral Interviewing, Python, System Design, and Marketing Analytics. The exact emphasis depends on the specific role you apply for.
EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Sources & methodology 3 sources ↗
No official company page is cited. Rounds and questions come from candidate reports and PracHub editorial material; each source shows the date it was read.
- 01EDB Software Engineer candidate reports ↗
Company-reported rounds, questions and FAQ.
Candidate reports · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 02PracHub Software Engineer practice ↗
PracHub practice material, not company-reported.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 03PracHub preparation framework ↗
PracHub preparation guidance.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22
Explore related engineering environments and compare the preparation focus.
Confluent Software Engineer Interview Guide
Concurrency exercises for Confluent candidates: check-then-act races, deadlock from inconsistent lock ordering, and why two individually atomic operations do not compose into an atomic update.
GitHub Software Engineer Interview Questions & Guide 2026
Testing exercises for GitHub software engineer prep: choosing boundary cases over repetition, isolating tests from shared clock and ordering, and treating an intermittent failure as a defect rather than noise.
Zulily Software Engineer Interview Guide
What Zulily asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.
Zoom Video Communications Software Engineer Interview Guide
What Zoom Video Communications asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.