Google has a long process. I've interviewed with them several times before; they occasionally refresh their past candidates and call them back.
The last time I spoke to them was about 3 years ago. The recruiter emailed me and asked to chat with me again. Through this process, they explained the steps:
Then, the panel participants submit written feedback to a committee who makes the decision. You never speak to the people making the decision, which sometimes causes a loss of fidelity between who is being spoken to and who is making the decision.
I don't care for the in-person approach of never talking to the decision-maker, but Google is reported to be a good employer.
This wasn't difficult, but it was an important question: They wanted the name of a Google employee I knew or worked with. If you know someone or worked with them, ahead of the interview, have their email or full name worked out, and be sure they will vouch for you.
Describe on a scale of 1 to 10 your familiarity with TCP/IP.
Describe on a scale of 1 to 10 your familiarity with Unix/Linux Internals.
Describe on a scale of 1 to 10 your familiarity with systems administration.
Follow-up: Which system call returns inode information? What signal does the "kill" command send by default? How many IP addresses are usable on a /23 network? Can you describe a TCP connection setup?
Describe your familiarity on a scale of 1 to 10 with Algorithms and Data Structures.
Describe on a scale of 1 to 10 each of these:
The following metrics were computed from 25 interview experiences for the Google Site Reliability Engineer role in Mountain View, California.
Google's interview process for their Site Reliability Engineer roles in Mountain View, California is extremely selective, failing the vast majority of engineers.
Candidates reported having very good feelings for Google's Site Reliability Engineer interview process in Mountain View, California.