The point is that it doesn't matter which is better or worse for the case, or if you know the pros/cons of each:

In those interviews (and in real work too) people still want you skewing towards certain answers. They wanna see you draw their pet architecture.

And it's the same thing in the workplace.

▲

Treegarden 2 days ago | parent [-]

I fully agree on workplace politics, but for system design interviews, are you not also just supposed to ask your interviewer, ie give them your premises and if they like your conclusions? I also understand that some companies and their interviews are weird, but thats okay too, no? You just reject them and move on.

	▲	whstl 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		If there's a big enough bias, the questions become entirely about finding that bias. And on 90% of cases the systems design questions are about something they designed in-house, and they often don't have a lot of experience as well. Also: if there's limited knowledge on the interviewer side, an incorrect answer to a question might throw off a more experienced candidate. It's no big deal but it becomes more about reading the room and knowing the company/interviewers than being honest in what you would do. People don't want to hear that their pet solution is not the best. Of course you still need to know the tech and explain it all.