AF
Progress
#2408MediumPremium on LC~35 min

Design SQL

Time ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m) · Space O(d) · Official statement on LeetCode

designhash map
cpppython

Solutions

// Time:  ctor:       O(t * max_m), t is the number of tables, max_m is the max number of columns in all tables
//        insertRow:  O(m), m is the number of columns
//        deleteRow:  O(1)
//        selectCell: O(m)
// Space: O(d), d is the total size of data

// hash table
class SQL {
public:
    SQL(vector<string>& names, vector<int>& columns) {
        for (int i = 0; i < size(names); ++i) {
            table_[names[i]].emplace_back(columns[i]);
        }
    }
    
    void insertRow(string name, vector<string> row) {
        row.emplace_back();  // soft delete
        table_[name].emplace_back(row);
    }
    
    void deleteRow(string name, int rowId) {
        table_[name][rowId].back() = "deleted";  // soft delete
    }
    
    string selectCell(string name, int rowId, int columnId) {
        return table_[name][rowId].back() != "deleted" ? table_[name][rowId][columnId - 1] : "";
    }

private:
    unordered_map<string, vector<vector<string>>> table_;
};

Beginner Explanation

What is Design SQL?

Design SQL (LeetCode #2408) is a Medium problem that primarily trains design.

How to think about it

  1. Restate the goal in your own words before coding.
  2. Work a tiny example by hand so the invariant becomes obvious.
  3. Identify the pattern — this problem aligns with hash map.
  4. Only then translate the idea into code.

Why this problem matters

It sits in the sweet spot of interview difficulty: multiple valid approaches, clear trade-offs. Official solution notes mention: Hash Table.

AlgoForge explanations are original teaching notes. Always open the official problem statement on LeetCode for constraints and examples.

Interview Walkthrough

Interview approach for Design SQL

Opening (30–60 seconds)

  • Clarify inputs/outputs and edge cases (empty input, single element, duplicates, overflow).
  • State a brute force so the interviewer knows you can solve it naively.
  • Propose the optimal direction tied to hash map.

Core solution narrative

  1. Define the state you track (pointers, DP cell, set membership, stack top, etc.).
  2. Explain the transition when you process the next element.
  3. Call out time (ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m)) and space (O(d)) before coding.
  4. Code cleanly; narrate variable names.

What interviewers listen for

  • Correctness on edge cases
  • Complexity honesty
  • Ability to discuss trade-offs (e.g., hash map space vs. sort + two pointers)

Follow-up questions they may ask

  • Can you solve it with less memory?
  • What if the input stream is infinite / doesn't fit in RAM?
  • How would tests look for adversarial inputs?

Optimized Approach

Optimized solution notes

The reference solutions on AlgoForge target ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m) time and O(d) space.

Pattern focus: hash map

Use the pattern as a checklist:

  • hash map — confirm the invariant holds after each step

Multiple methods appear in the source solutions — compare them and explain when each is preferable.

Implementation tips

  • Prefer readable names over micro-optimizations in interviews.
  • Extract helpers only when they clarify (e.g., expand-around-center, DFS visit).
  • After AC-level logic, re-scan for off-by-one and null checks.

Complexity Analysis

Complexity

Measure Bound
Time ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m)
Space O(d)

How to justify this in an interview

  • Time: count loops, map/set operations, and recursive branching; state average vs worst case if relevant.
  • Space: include hash maps, recursion stack, and output allocation when the problem asks for it.

If your implementation differs from the reference, re-derive big-O from your code — never memorize a complexity you cannot defend.

Common Mistakes

Common mistakes on Design SQL

  1. Skipping edge cases — empty collections, single-element inputs, max constraints.
  2. Wrong invariant for hash map — updating state too early or too late.
  3. Mutating input unexpectedly when the problem forbids it.
  4. Off-by-one in windows, ranges, or binary search bounds.
  5. Ignoring overflow / precision for integer arithmetic problems.
  6. Overengineering — jumping to an advanced structure when a simpler approach works.

Alternative Approaches

Alternatives

The source file includes more than one method. Compare:

  1. Primary optimized path — best complexity for typical interviews.
  2. Secondary approach — often brute force, sorting-based, or space-optimized variant.

Practice articulating when you would pick each (constraints, readability, follow-ups).

Edge Cases

Edge cases checklist

  • Minimum input size
  • Maximum input size / time limits
  • Duplicates and already-sorted input
  • Negative numbers / zeros (if applicable)
  • Disconnected structures (graphs/trees)
  • Single path vs branching recursion depth

Pattern Recognition

Spotting this pattern

Signal phrases that point to hash map:

  • Sorted input or ability to sort without changing the answer class
  • Need for contiguous subarray / substring → consider sliding window
  • Need for O(1) membership → hash set/map
  • Optimal substructure + overlapping subproblems → DP
  • Connectivity / components → graph DFS/BFS or Union-Find

Primary topics: design.

Follow-up Interview Questions

Follow-ups

  1. How does the solution change if the input is a stream?
  2. Can you solve it in-place?
  3. What if duplicates must be handled differently?
  4. How would you parallelize the approach?
  5. Design tests that would break a buggy implementation.

Practice Recommendations

What to practice next

  1. Re-solve Design SQL in a second language (cpp, python).
  2. Drill 3–5 more problems tagged design.
  3. Teach the solution out loud in under 5 minutes.
  4. Add this problem to your revision calendar in 3 days and 14 days.

Visualization

Conceptual diagram for Design SQL: show input structure (design), highlight the moving parts of the hash map approach, and annotate each step with the maintained invariant and complexity.

Study checklist

  • Read the official problem statement on LeetCode
  • Solve on paper / whiteboard first
  • Implement the hash map approach
  • Verify edge cases from the checklist
  • State time and space complexity aloud
  • Compare with the AlgoForge reference solution
  • Schedule a revision session

Revision notes

Design SQL (#2408) — Medium. Pattern: hash map. Complexity: ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m) time / O(d) space. Re-derive the invariant before coding.

FAQs

What is the time complexity of Design SQL?+

The reference solutions aim for ctor: O(t * maxm) insertRow: O(m) deleteRow: O(1) selectCell: O(m) time and O(d) space. Always re-derive complexity from the code you write in the interview.

What pattern does Design SQL use?+

It primarily maps to hash map, within the broader topic of design.

Is Design SQL good for interviews?+

Yes — as a Medium problem it is a solid practice target. Pair it with related problems in the same pattern family for spaced repetition.

Where can I read the official statement?+

Open the official LeetCode page for constraints and examples: https://leetcode.com/problems/design-sql/