ChallengeGenerate matching shard id–answer

time to read 2 min | 371 words

I posed a potential problem for a job interview. Given the following function, generate another key that has the same shard:

In other words, give “users/71” and a prefix of “orders/654”, generate a key that would be placed on the same shard as “users/71”. The answer in this case can be: “orders/654-vaueaa”.

In order to answer the question, we need to understand what is going on here. The function above is a fancy way to extract 16 bits of information from the key using a cryptographically hash function. MD5 is no longer considered secured, but given the fact that I’m needing just 16 bits, that is not an issue. The code above is slightly more complex than needed, I could simplify it to this and have the same effect (but not the same result, mind):

The need to generate a matching shard id is another way to say that we need a hash collision. Given that the key space is 2^16, and that we can assume that any mutation to the key will result effectively random changes to the result, we can simply generate different keys and try to see if they match. Here is a simple way to do so:

We are effectively throwing a dice and seeing if this match. So it is a probability game to wait until we have a collision. The actual implementation isn’t that important, what is interesting is to talk about the implications here:

  • Are there better ways to go about doing something like this? Not really, given that MD5 isn’t that broken.
  • How much time will it take to generate a shard id match? The answer, usually around 64K tries. But why is interesting. The birthday attack issues don’t play here, because we don’t need to match to multiple items, just one. So we role the dice and see if we match on the value.
  • Can we speed this up? Using a different hash function would probably help, yes.
  • What other ways do we have to handle this? Different shard id generation would allow much better alternative.

The last question is where we get into more interesting details about system design, ergonomics of the choices we make and get to see how the candidate actually thinks.

More posts in "Challenge" series:

  1. (06 May 2022) Spot the optimization–solution
  2. (05 May 2022) Spot the optimization
  3. (06 Apr 2022) Why is this code broken?
  4. (16 Dec 2021) Find the slow down–answer
  5. (15 Dec 2021) Find the slow down
  6. (03 Nov 2021) The code review bug that gives me nightmares–The fix
  7. (02 Nov 2021) The code review bug that gives me nightmares–the issue
  8. (01 Nov 2021) The code review bug that gives me nightmares
  9. (16 Jun 2021) Detecting livelihood in a distributed cluster
  10. (21 Apr 2020) Generate matching shard id–answer
  11. (20 Apr 2020) Generate matching shard id
  12. (02 Jan 2020) Spot the bug in the stream
  13. (28 Sep 2018) The loop that leaks–Answer
  14. (27 Sep 2018) The loop that leaks
  15. (03 Apr 2018) The invisible concurrency bug–Answer
  16. (02 Apr 2018) The invisible concurrency bug
  17. (31 Jan 2018) Find the bug in the fix–answer
  18. (30 Jan 2018) Find the bug in the fix
  19. (19 Jan 2017) What does this code do?
  20. (26 Jul 2016) The race condition in the TCP stack, answer
  21. (25 Jul 2016) The race condition in the TCP stack
  22. (28 Apr 2015) What is the meaning of this change?
  23. (26 Sep 2013) Spot the bug
  24. (27 May 2013) The problem of locking down tasks…
  25. (17 Oct 2011) Minimum number of round trips
  26. (23 Aug 2011) Recent Comments with Future Posts
  27. (02 Aug 2011) Modifying execution approaches
  28. (29 Apr 2011) Stop the leaks
  29. (23 Dec 2010) This code should never hit production
  30. (17 Dec 2010) Your own ThreadLocal
  31. (03 Dec 2010) Querying relative information with RavenDB
  32. (29 Jun 2010) Find the bug
  33. (23 Jun 2010) Dynamically dynamic
  34. (28 Apr 2010) What killed the application?
  35. (19 Mar 2010) What does this code do?
  36. (04 Mar 2010) Robust enumeration over external code
  37. (16 Feb 2010) Premature optimization, and all of that…
  38. (12 Feb 2010) Efficient querying
  39. (10 Feb 2010) Find the resource leak
  40. (21 Oct 2009) Can you spot the bug?
  41. (18 Oct 2009) Why is this wrong?
  42. (17 Oct 2009) Write the check in comment
  43. (15 Sep 2009) NH Prof Exporting Reports
  44. (02 Sep 2009) The lazy loaded inheritance many to one association OR/M conundrum
  45. (01 Sep 2009) Why isn’t select broken?
  46. (06 Aug 2009) Find the bug fixes
  47. (26 May 2009) Find the bug
  48. (14 May 2009) multi threaded test failure
  49. (11 May 2009) The regex that doesn’t match
  50. (24 Mar 2009) probability based selection
  51. (13 Mar 2009) C# Rewriting
  52. (18 Feb 2009) write a self extracting program
  53. (04 Sep 2008) Don't stop with the first DSL abstraction
  54. (02 Aug 2008) What is the problem?
  55. (28 Jul 2008) What does this code do?
  56. (26 Jul 2008) Find the bug fix
  57. (05 Jul 2008) Find the deadlock
  58. (03 Jul 2008) Find the bug
  59. (02 Jul 2008) What is wrong with this code
  60. (05 Jun 2008) why did the tests fail?
  61. (27 May 2008) Striving for better syntax
  62. (13 Apr 2008) calling generics without the generic type
  63. (12 Apr 2008) The directory tree
  64. (24 Mar 2008) Find the version
  65. (21 Jan 2008) Strongly typing weakly typed code
  66. (28 Jun 2007) Windsor Null Object Dependency Facility