I think his point was that SQLite still has to work around the durability problem described in the article. As such, SQLite isn't a solution, it's a middleware API. I'm not trying to knock it, but solving a problem by adding a new layer isn't good design.
Also, middleware shouldn't be needed in open source because you can simply patch the underlying API. That the middleware is the best solution in this case says a lot about the problem.
SQLite does solve the problem because it knows exactly what fsync()/fdatasync()/whatever calls are necessary to persist a file, and it also knows that for the many operating systems that SQLite is implemented on. It's also tested regularly.
I can't believe the level of ignorance in this thread.
So the reliability and storage semantics bottom out at the filesystem after all. It's not as simple as 'I'll use SQLite: problem solved'. Not for the authors of SQLite, for sure.
