"The new build of SQL is designed to handle all data in-memory, a shift that would increase processing times by a factor of thirty, Nadella claimed."
Err, I don't think so and the simplistic fallacy: sizeof(RAM) < sizeof(hard disc).
I believe it can keep a particular table type in RAM without a persistent backing store but not all data. With enough batteries and generators and clustering of your RAM based tables and trickling back to rust/SSD, that could be quite nifty if handled very carefully.
Still, it makes a nice marketing epithet. I'm sure no other DB does that already ...
Cheers
Jon