Not that any engineer worth a damn would use a database that loses data in the first place. Ironic and invalid generalization. When the tradeoffs are acceptab

Not that any engineer worth a damn would use a database that loses data in the first place. Ironic and invalid generalization. When the tradeoffs are acceptable or preferable (e.g. data persistence is not vital and your application can get better performance out of a database that can "lose data") it makes sense. Whether it's relevant to the article or not, this is simply false and not constructive at all.