Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, everyone fails and you think it is a good question? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can't reasonably answer the question, because I haven't really needed to know it. When I need to know it, I'll learn it, and quickly. How is that question a good measure of me if you are not hiring me to architect a router or something where it pertains? I could ask you questions in my domain that you'd be hopeless at an…
The other thing the question tests for is rigidity of thinking. You can answer the question - pick whatever part of the stack you're familiar with and explain what's going on there. If you're a web developer, talk about how the browser loads the HTML for the page, then pulls out the tags and fetches CSS for them, then executes any tags. It sees a tag, then an , and uses that to render the query box. If you type and t…
Whoa wait, that can't be totally true? The full text of everything is in RAM? Not just the indexes and whatnot? I guess the textual information is a small fraction of the total bytes, and some clever compression would make it possible, but wow.
So even at Google scale, some problems are already possible just to put in RAM. (The original Page rank paper spent a bit taking about aiming for 1 seek per lookup.. And my own multi billion record lookup system also found that to be the biggest latency.. But even I'm dealing with at least a TB a day of mostly text protocols and am happy to get the rough indexes into RAM.)
Wow.