> Anyone who expects a database to always have records and that the absence of a record is an "exception" has a very strange way of thinking. This isn't someth

> Anyone who expects a database to always have records and that the absence of a record is an "exception" has a very strange way of thinking. This isn't something you can make universal statements about, because it depends on context. If the program knows it just put or saw the record there, is it strange to assume it's still there? If the program completely controls the database and something else in it implies the record is there, is it still strange to assume? Sometimes broken assumptions can only signify that something has gone very wrong, and it's not worth handling them at a fine-grained level. That leads to the "gotta catch em all" antipattern the article mentions.