I think you’re right on this but the article mentions the lack of a data base. If a data base is finally available it seems it would be a monumental task to maintain it.
I also agree with the “journalist” remark.
For reasons already mentioned, it wouldn't make sense long-term.
You just want to compare the blood from the crime scene last week to the blood of a suspect today.
If it's a match, you do the full DNA test to prove it.
If it's wildly different, you got the wrong guy.
If it's close, you decide to do full DNA test based on whatever other evidence you have.