In my experience, at least in the field of Solid-state Physics, double-blind review is quite rare. Also, it would be challenging to implement, since it's often very clear who is the group that submitted a paper. The community is not so big, everyone know everyone, samples and techniques are quite peculiar for each group and a paper typically cite a lot of previous work, to avoid large repetitions. It's not uncommon to guess well the reviewers
The point is that, there are no downsides to double-blind peer review, and it is hence possible that with double blind peer review, less well-known people might get more journal articles. This might lead to more diverse research techniques being used since you don't need a big name to publish anymore. And then, in a few years, you might find it hard to guess the groups from techniques, because a single group might have multiple different techniques.
