Flextrade – Associate Production Support Engineer
1. Company and Role
Company: Flextrade
Role: Associate Production Support Engineer
Team: Data Infrastructure
Batch/Year of Graduation: 2027
Branch: Information Technology
The role is part of the Data Infrastructure team. Although the position is titled Associate Production Support Engineer, it is not a conventional DevOps role. Flextrade works with real-time financial/share-market data and continuous screening. The work is mainly related to server optimization, feature integration, and resolving issues and bugs in the systems handling this data.
2. Application Process
Application: On-Campus
Online Assessment: Conducted at college
Interview Process: Technical Round 1 → Technical Round 2 → Director Round → HR
The process was conducted at Flextrade office and all the interview rounds took place on the same day.
3. Interview Rounds
Round 1: Online Assessment
Type: MCQ + Coding
Duration: 75 minutes
Difficulty: Easy to Medium
The Online Assessment consisted of five sections:
General Aptitude – 5 questions
Linux Basics – 4 questions
DSA – 1 coding question
Linux Intermediate – 4 questions
C++ Basics – 5 MCQs
The Linux Basics section consisted of questions on Linux commands.
The DSA section had one coding question, and C++ was mandatory. The question was of easy to medium difficulty and was based on basic DSA concepts such as arrays, strings, stack and queue.
The Linux Intermediate section was more practical. The questions involved selecting the correct order of steps to perform Linux operations.
The C++ section consisted of basic MCQs covering concepts such as pointers, references and OOP.
The total time given was 75 minutes. I completed the assessment in around 35–40 minutes.
Round 2: Technical Interview 1
Type: Technical
Main Topics: Projects, Linux/Unix, DSA, C++, STL, Git
The interview started with a discussion about my projects. The discussion was not very deep and then moved towards Linux commands.
Linux was discussed in considerable depth. The interviewer asked about commands such as top, grep and find, along with their different combinations and use cases.
The discussion included:
Case-insensitive searching
Hidden files
Archived files
Regular expressions for searching
Searching for processes
Different ways of killing processes
Combining commands using the | operator
The focus was on understanding how the commands could actually be used together rather than just knowing their basic syntax.
I was also asked a basic string-based DSA question. I was asked to come up with different approaches for solving it.
The interview then moved towards Core C++ and STL. The topics discussed included:
Core C++
STL
std::arrays and arrays
Vectors
Pointers
References
Memory leaks
RAII
Modern C++
Git was also discussed, including commits and handling merge conflicts.
Overall, the round covered a wide range of technical topics, with Linux/Unix and C++ being major areas of discussion.
Round 3: Technical Interview 2
Type: System Design and Situational Problem Solving
Duration: Approximately 1.5 hours
This round started around 10–15 minutes after the first technical round.
The interviewer was very friendly and started by introducing himself. I was a little nervous at the beginning, but the interviewer made the conversation comfortable.
This round was completely different from the first technical round. It mainly consisted of system-design and situational questions.
One of the situations involved around 300 functions, where a bug could be present in any one of them. I was asked how I would find the bug optimally and what approaches I could use to overcome the problem.
Another situation involved a system where data comes from an input source and passes through three processes at the company before reaching the client. The same architecture had been working for around five years, but suddenly a 20-second delay was introduced. I was asked what could be responsible for the delay and how I would approach resolving it.
Another scenario involved a process that started with 100 MB of memory at the beginning of the day and reached 50 GB by the end of the day, with cache memory excluded from consideration. I was asked what could be responsible for this increase and how I would overcome it.
There were also situations involving multiple tasks, where I was asked which task I would prioritise, how I would decide the priority, and what conditions I would consider.
For these questions, I tried to give as many possible approaches as I could and stayed with the fundamentals while explaining my reasoning.
The round lasted approximately 1.5 hours and was the longest one.
At the end of the interview, the interviewer told me that he would be recommending me for the next round.
Round 4: Director Round
Type: Technical + Personal
Main Topics: Core C++, STL, Unix
The Director round started around 10–15 minutes after the second technical round.
This round was unexpected for me because we had initially been told that there would be two technical rounds followed by an HR round. Because of this, I was quite nervous when I found out that there would be another round.
The discussion was a combination of technical and personal questions.
Core C++ and STL were discussed again, which made it clear to me that these were important areas for the role.
There was also a Unix command-related question involving a log file. I was asked to find an error in the log and display the two lines before and two lines after the error to get the surrounding information.
I tried to work out the command based on my understanding. I was able to arrive at the approach, although the Director also helped me during the process.
Compared to the second technical round, I felt that my performance in this round was a little below my own expectations, mainly because I was quite nervous after the unexpected Director round.
After the interview, I was asked to wait for some time for feedback.
Round 5: HR Round
Type: HR / Behavioural / Team Fit
I waited for around 40 minutes after the Director round.
This was probably one of the most memorable parts of the day for me. Throughout the entire interview process, my friend was there to keep me relaxed and provide mental support. During those 40 minutes, we both discussed some of the questions that had been asked in the three rounds, along with some casual conversation and chit-chat. He helped me stay calm while waiting for the feedback.
Later, I was informed that I would be appearing for the HR round.
The HR round went quite well and mainly involved behavioural questions and team-fit discussion.
4. Overall Experience and Tips
Overall, my experience with Flextrade was very positive.
The interview process covered a broad range of topics, but the major focus was on C++, STL, Linux/Unix and problem-solving. The second technical round was particularly different from a conventional technical interview because it focused on system behaviour and situational problems.
I felt that the interviewers were interested in understanding how I approached a problem and what possibilities I considered, rather than expecting one fixed answer for every situation.
Another important part of my experience was the communication throughout the process. Each round involved a good amount of discussion, and being able to explain my thought process was important.
What to Prepare
For this role, I would recommend focusing on:
Core C++
STL
Pointers and references
Memory leaks
RAII
Modern C++
Linux/Unix commands
Process searching and killing
Pipes and command combinations
Regular expressions
Log searching
Basic DSA, particularly arrays, strings, stack and queue
Git commits and merge conflicts
System-design and situational questions
Tips for Aspirants
I would recommend being thorough with the fundamentals rather than only preparing commonly asked interview questions.
For Linux, it is useful to understand how commands can be combined and used in practical situations.
For C++, Core C++ and STL should be prepared well, as they were discussed in multiple rounds.
For the situational questions, I found it useful to think through the problem and explain different possible approaches instead of immediately trying to give one final answer.
Most importantly, stay calm throughout the process. The interview had multiple rounds on the same day, and having someone around who could keep me relaxed made a significant difference for me.
Verdict
Selected
5. Additional Comments
The entire process was conducted on the same day and was longer than I initially expected because of the unexpected Director round.
The second technical round was the longest and, for me, the most interesting round because of the system-design and situational questions.
While I was more nervous than expected during the Director round, the overall experience was positive. My friend being there throughout the day, keeping my mind relaxed and providing mental support between the rounds, was something I genuinely appreciated and was an important part of getting through the entire process.
