The described behavior is "expected" and "understood". Saying that "you should assume worst from your database" is not something I would ever use for describing DB with ACID semantics.
I wasn't spreading FUD about anything. From the article there was issues with every databases expected behaviour. My point again was that you should expect and manage failure in your application layer. It's what sensible architecture looks like.
And ACID does NOT guarentee that you will not lose data. It is a theory not an implementation. I have lost data with both Oracle and Teradata due to bugs.
That article has various issues, for example, calling Postgres commit protocol as a special case of two phase commit is not really correct. Postgres has 2pc: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-prepare-transa... but that was not tested.
The described behavior is "expected" and "understood". Saying that "you should assume worst from your database" is not something I would ever use for describing DB with ACID semantics.