As a Software Engineer at Rooms To Go, you are positioned at the intersection of high-volume retail operations and digital innovation. This role is critical to maintaining the seamless customer experience that defines our brand, whether through optimizing our e-commerce platforms, enhancing internal supply chain tools, or integrating cutting-edge 3D visualization technologies to help customers design their living spaces. You will be responsible for building, maintaining, and scaling the software systems that power our omnichannel retail presence. This role demands a balance of technical precision and the ability to operate within a fast-paced environment where your code directly impacts consumer purchasing decisions and operational efficiency. You will collaborate with cross-functional teams to solve complex problems, ensuring that our digital infrastructure remains as robust and reliable as our physical showrooms. ##### Tip Given the retail nature of the business, your work may involve supporting high-traffic periods; demonstrate your ability to write scalable, performance-oriented code during your interview.
Initial Contact
reportedThe process begins with initial outreach to discuss your background and fit for the role.
What to demonstrate
- The process begins with initial outreach to discuss your background and fit for the role
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: When would you choose to use the Context API over Redux for state management?
- Answer aloud and timed: How does the useEffect hook function, and what is the significance of the dependency array?
High-Level Screening
reportedA screening to evaluate your overall qualifications and technical aptitude.
What to demonstrate
- A screening to evaluate your overall qualifications and technical aptitude
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Can you explain the process of refactoring a class component to a functional component?
- Answer aloud and timed: What are the performance implications of using specific 3D libraries like Three.js or Babylon.js in a browser environment?
Hands-On Technical Assessment
reportedYou will participate in practical assessments to demonstrate your technical skills.
What to demonstrate
- You will participate in practical assessments to demonstrate your technical skills
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Walk me through your process for performing a Pull Request (PR) review; what specific issues are you looking for?
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you handle feedback or criticism when a peer identifies a bug or an optimization in your code?
Team Integration Discussion
reportedDiscussions focused on how you would fit into the team and contribute to the culture.
What to demonstrate
- Discussions focused on how you would fit into the team and contribute to the culture
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you balance the need for rapid feature delivery with the necessity of maintaining clean, testable code?
- Work React until you can explain it without notes
Professional Alignment Discussion
reportedConversations to ensure alignment between your career goals and the company's objectives.
What to demonstrate
- Conversations to ensure alignment between your career goals and the company's objectives
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Work React until you can explain it without notes
- Work React Hooks (useEffect) until you can explain it without notes
Final Decision
reportedThe final step where the team makes a decision regarding your application.
What to demonstrate
- The final step where the team makes a decision regarding your application
- Depth in React
How to prepare
- Work React until you can explain it without notes
- Work React Hooks (useEffect) until you can explain it without notes
PracHub editorial advice for the preparation topics above.
Prepare your portfolio
If you have worked with Three.js or other complex libraries, have specific examples ready to discuss the challenges you faced and how you overcame them.
Practice concise communication
Because interviewers may have limited time, practice delivering your answers in a "STAR" (Situation, Task, Action, Result) format to ensure you stay on point.
Be ready for criticism
We often test how you respond to feedback by pointing out potential improvements in your code. Treat this as a collaborative discussion, not a confrontation.
Choose a category, try a prompt, then open its approach, worked solution or follow-up when you need it.
How does the useEffect hook function, and what is the significance of the dependency array?
How does the useEffect hook function, and what is the significance of the dependency array?
Approach
- Restate the input: its shape, its size, and what is guaranteed about it.
- Name the brute-force solution and its complexity before improving on it.
- Choose the data structure from the access pattern, not from familiarity.
- State the target complexity and say which constraint rules the naive version out.
Follow-up
- How does this change if the input no longer fits in memory?
- What is the worst case, and how likely is it on real data?
Walk me through your process for performing a Pull Request (PR) review; what specific issues are you looking f
Walk me through your process for performing a Pull Request (PR) review; what specific issues are you looking for?
Approach
- Restate the input: its shape, its size, and what is guaranteed about it.
- Name the brute-force solution and its complexity before improving on it.
- Choose the data structure from the access pattern, not from familiarity.
- State the target complexity and say which constraint rules the naive version out.
Follow-up
- How does this change if the input no longer fits in memory?
- What is the worst case, and how likely is it on real data?
How do you balance the need for rapid feature delivery with the necessity of maintaining clean, testable code?
How do you balance the need for rapid feature delivery with the necessity of maintaining clean, testable code?
Approach
- Restate the input: its shape, its size, and what is guaranteed about it.
- Name the brute-force solution and its complexity before improving on it.
- Choose the data structure from the access pattern, not from familiarity.
- State the target complexity and say which constraint rules the naive version out.
Follow-up
- How does this change if the input no longer fits in memory?
- What is the worst case, and how likely is it on real data?
Denormalise tenant onto revisions and backfill it live
resource_revision (revision_id, resource_id, version, actor_user_id, change_kind, patch, request_id, created_at) has 400M rows and no tenant column; tenant_id lives only on resource. Two reads need it: a tenant-scoped audit feed ordered by created_at DESC, and an offboarding purge. Both join back to resource today. Justify adding tenant_id to resource_revision against those two reads, name the anomaly the copy introduces and the constraint that prevents it, then give the ordered migration for a live table taking 1.2k writes/second — the lock each step takes, how the backfill is batched, and where each step stops being reversible. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Justify from the access path rather than from taste. Without the column, the audit feed either scans resource_revision by created_at and discards other tenants' rows, or resolves the tenant's resource_ids first and probes with them — both proportional to the tenant's whole history rather than to one page. With (tenant_id, created_at DESC, revision_id DESC) it is a seek that stops at 50 rows, and the purge becomes a ranged delete instead of a join.
- Name the cost exactly: a second copy of a fact can disagree with the first. Make the disagreement unwritable rather than documented — add UNIQUE (resource_id, tenant_id) on resource so it can serve as a foreign-key target, then FOREIGN KEY (resource_id, tenant_id) REFERENCES resource (resource_id, tenant_id) on the revision table. A revision can then only ever carry its parent's tenant.
- Step one, expand: ALTER TABLE resource_revision ADD COLUMN tenant_id BIGINT NULL, with no default, so it is a catalogue change and no rewrite. It still needs ACCESS EXCLUSIVE for an instant, and that instant queues behind the longest open transaction on the table while every later query queues behind it — set lock_timeout to 2s and retry rather than wait.
- Step two, dual-write: deploy the writer that populates tenant_id on every new revision while reads still use the join. Reversible by redeploying the previous build, because nothing reads the column yet.
Follow-up
- The backfill is half finished and a rollback is required. What state is the table in, and what does the previous build do with a half-populated column?
- How do you verify the backfill actually finished, given rows are still being inserted while it runs?
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?
When would you choose to use the Context API over Redux for state management?
When would you choose to use the Context API over Redux for state management?
Approach
- Say who the caller is and what they do when the call fails halfway.
- Define the identity of a request so a retry cannot double-apply it.
- Separate accepted, pending, failed and confirmed; they are different facts.
- Design the error taxonomy before the success shape; callers branch on it.
Follow-up
- What happens if the caller retries after a timeout?
- How does a client discover it is on an old version of this contract?
Can you explain the process of refactoring a class component to a functional component?
Can you explain the process of refactoring a class component to a functional component?
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 performance implications of using specific 3D libraries like Three.js or Babylon.js in a browser
What are the performance implications of using specific 3D libraries like Three.js or Babylon.js in a browser environment?
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?
Listing latency scales with page size, not with filters
The tenant listing endpoint reads resource filtered by tenant_id and status, ordered by updated_at DESC, and returns each row plus the owner's display name from app_user and the actor of that resource's latest resource_revision. p99 is 55 ms at 10 rows per page and 1.4 s at 200. Database telemetry shows 401 statements per request, each under 1 ms, and nothing in the slow-query log. Diagnose the cause and give the fix, stating the statement count per request and the p99 you expect afterwards.
Approach
- Read the counters before forming a theory. 401 statements for 200 rows is one driver query plus two per row, and sub-millisecond execution with an empty slow-query log rules out a bad plan. The time is round trips, which is why it is invisible in every per-query metric and scales with rows returned rather than with filter selectivity.
- Name the two per-row statements from their normalised text: a single-row app_user lookup by user_id, and a resource_revision lookup by resource_id ordered by version DESC LIMIT 1. Confirm by dropping those two response fields and watching the statement count fall to one. That locates the calls in the serialisation layer, not the repository.
- Check that the arithmetic accounts for the whole gap. Measure one round trip to the replica in isolation; 400 trips at roughly 3 ms of network plus 0.2 ms of execution is about 1.3 s on top of a 55 ms baseline, which matches. If the multiplication had fallen short, the N+1 would only be part of the story and you would keep looking.
- Batch both lookups. Collect owner_user_ids and resource_ids from the driver query, then issue WHERE tenant_id = $1 AND user_id = ANY($2) for the users, and PostgreSQL's SELECT DISTINCT ON (resource_id) ... WHERE resource_id = ANY($2) ORDER BY resource_id, version DESC for the latest revision, which the UNIQUE (resource_id, version) index serves directly. On an engine without DISTINCT ON, use a lateral join or a row_number window. Three statements per request at any page size.
Follow-up
- The page size is capped at 200 today. What breaks first if it is raised to 2,000, and is it still this bug?
- How do you stop the next N+1 from reaching production, given that no individual query is slow and the endpoint's tests pass?
Built from the rounds and topics Rooms To Go candidates report.
Prepare, practise & reflect
One practical outcome each day. Spend longer where you need it.
0 / 7 done01Map the Rooms To Go loop
- Write out the reported sequence: Initial Contact, High-Level Screening, Hands-On Technical Assessment, Team Integration Discussion, Professional Alignment Discussion, Final Decision.
- 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 6 reported rounds, with the weakest marked.
02Work React
- Spend the session on React, which Rooms To Go candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in React and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in React.
03Work React Hooks (useEffect)
- Spend the session on React Hooks (useEffect), which Rooms To Go candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in React Hooks (useEffect) and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in React Hooks (useEffect).
04Work useEffect dependency array
- Spend the session on useEffect dependency array, which Rooms To Go candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in useEffect dependency array and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in useEffect dependency array.
05Answer out loud: React and Frontend Development
- Answer aloud, timed: When would you choose to use the Context API over Redux for state management?
- Answer aloud, timed: How does the useEffect hook function, and what is the significance of the dependency array?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported React and Frontend Development question(s), under time.
06Answer out loud: Technical Problem Solving and Code Quality
- Answer aloud, timed: Walk me through your process for performing a Pull Request (PR) review; what specific issues are you looking for?
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you handle feedback or criticism when a peer identifies a bug or an optimization in your code?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Technical Problem Solving and Code Quality question(s), under time.
07Dry run for Rooms To Go
- Run one full mock under time, then write down the two questions you most want to ask your interviewers.
Deliverable: A completed timed mock and two questions to ask.
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.
How do you handle feedback or criticism when a peer identifies a bug or an optimization in your code?
How do you handle feedback or criticism when a peer identifies a bug or an optimization in your code?
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?
Unblock an engineer without taking the keyboard
A teammate has spent two days on a job handler that occasionally writes duplicate rows. They are certain the queue is delivering twice by mistake. You suspect a lease expiring under a slow handler, so the job is running concurrently with itself. Describe how you have unblocked someone in this position: what you asked before offering a hypothesis, what you showed them rather than told them, and what you left them owning. Then say what you would do if their theory turned out to be the right one.
Approach
- Ask before diagnosing, and ask for things answerable from data they already have: the attempt count on the job rows that produced duplicates, the handler's observed duration against its lease expiry, and whether the duplicate rows share a natural key that a unique constraint could have caught.
- Teach the shape rather than the answer. A lease cannot distinguish a dead worker from a slow one, so a handler that outruns its lease is running twice by design, and deploys deliver the other half by killing handlers mid-run on every rollout. Both of their candidate theories produce identical duplicate rows, which is why the evidence has to come from timings rather than from argument.
- Hand over a checklist they execute: a natural key on every write the handler performs so the second copy collides rather than appends, the record of intent written before any external effect, a lease heartbeat while running, and the metric that shows it working.
- Keep ownership with them deliberately. Pair on the first write, then step back; if you finish it yourself you have closed one ticket and left the same person stuck on the next redelivery.
Follow-up
- How would you distinguish a genuine double-delivery from a lease expiry using only the data already stored?
- Their handler calls an external endpoint before recording that it did. What do you tell them to change first?
Turn a code review disagreement into a decision
A colleague's change updates a row with UPDATE resource SET version = version + 1 WHERE resource_id = $1 AND version = $2 and treats an affected-row count of zero as a successful no-op. You read that as a silently lost update; they think returning 200 is friendlier to clients than returning a conflict. Describe how you have handled a review disagreement of this shape: what goes in the comment, when you leave the thread, and who decides. Then write the comment you would leave here, in under 80 words.
Approach
- Sort the disagreement before writing anything. A silently discarded write is a correctness claim about data; the choice between 409 and 412 is taste. Only the first justifies blocking a merge, and saying which one you are doing is most of the value of the comment.
- Make the claim reproducible in the comment itself with an interleaving rather than a principle: A reads version 7, B reads version 7, B commits version 8, A's predicate matches zero rows, A is told it succeeded and A's edit is gone.
- Offer the alternative with its cost attached: return 409 carrying the current version and the revision that won, so the client can re-read and re-apply. Note that automatic retry is not the fix, because a retry re-reads the winner's state and reapplies an intent formed against data that no longer exists.
- Apply an escalation rule you can state: two round trips on the thread, then a call, and the service's owner decides rather than the reviewer. A reviewer who cannot be overruled is a bottleneck with extra steps.
Follow-up
- Where would you put the test that fails if someone reintroduces the swallowed zero rowcount?
- The author says clients cannot handle a 409. How do you check whether that is true?
- 01
How do you handle feedback or criticism when a peer identifies a bug or an optimization in your code?
- 02
A teammate has spent two days on a job handler that occasionally writes duplicate rows. They are certain the queue is delivering twice by mistake. You suspect a lease expiring under a slow handler, so the job is running concurrently with itself. Describe how you have unblocked someone in this position: what you asked before offering a hypothesis, what you showed them rather than told them, and what you left them owning. Then say what you would do if their theory turned out to be the right one.
- 03
A colleague's change updates a row with UPDATE resource SET version = version + 1 WHERE resource_id = $1 AND version = $2 and treats an affected-row count of zero as a successful no-op. You read that as a silently lost update; they think returning 200 is friendlier to clients than returning a conflict. Describe how you have handled a review disagreement of this shape: what goes in the comment, when you leave the thread, and who decides. Then write the comment you would leave here, in under 80 words.
How should I prepare for the technical portion of the interview?
Focus on your fundamentals. Be prepared to explain how you would refactor code, why you chose specific libraries, and how you manage state in complex applications.
Rooms To Go Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Is the culture at Rooms To Go fast-paced?
Yes, as a large-scale retail organization, we operate in an environment where speed and reliability are paramount. Successful candidates are those who can deliver high-quality work without losing focus under pressure.
Rooms To Go Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Should I ask questions during the interview?
Absolutely. Despite the fast pace, we encourage you to ask about team dynamics, the tech stack, and how the team handles technical debt. It demonstrates your engagement and thoughtful approach to work.
Rooms To Go Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What topics does Rooms To Go test in interviews?
Rooms To Go interviews most often cover React, Operations Management, Marketing Analytics, Sales Process (Retail Account Executive Workflow), and Portfolio design review. The exact emphasis depends on the specific role you apply for.
Rooms To Go 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.
- 01Rooms To Go 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.
Vercel Software Engineer Interview Guide
Debugging practice for Vercel software engineer prep built on a reproduction you trust, narrowing to the smallest failing input, and changing one variable per run so the result stays attributable.
Spotify Software Engineer Interview Guide
Timed practice for Spotify software engineer candidates who lose time to the clock: short problems taken end to end, then reviewed against a written rubric rather than a passing test run.
Shopify Software Engineer Interview Guide
Timed practice for Shopify software engineer candidates who lose time to the clock: short problems taken end to end, then reviewed against a written rubric rather than a passing test run.
Ramp Software Engineer Interview Guide
Systems practice for Ramp software engineer candidates, weighted toward payments and lending work: the load that actually arrives, the failure modes that matter there, and the invariants a partial outage must not break.