chore(examples): Rename in-memory db in examples.

[d-bohls]

In our examples, make it clear that in-memory
databases are not restricted to ':memory:'.

Also, it's probably better to avoid using
':memory:' for in-memory databases in case
that might cause conflict with the stream sessions.

• This contribution adheres to CONTRIBUTING.md.
• New tests have been created for any new features or regression tests for bugfixes.
• tox successfully runs, including unit tests and style checks (see CONTRIBUTING.md).

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 67.818% when pulling ea86312 on d-bohls:inMemoryDbExamples into 779b77c on ni:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 67.818% when pulling ea86312 on d-bohls:inMemoryDbExamples into 779b77c on ni:master.

[jashnani]

I'd prefer we use :memory: in our examples unless we have two or more in-memory databases being used at the same time. I don't think we should promote using random strings between the colons because there is a convention for this. See database documentation, section Multiple Databases Simultaneously.

"NI-XNET allows opening up to seven distinct databases at the same time. You can open any database from a database file or in memory. To open multiple in-memory databases, use the name :memory[]:; for example, :memory:, :memory1:, :memory2:."

Maybe we can create a new example showing that you can edit/use multiple in-memory databases at the same time. Thoughts?

[d-bohls]

I see your point that the documentation/examples seem to encourage the user to use ":memory[n]:" naming for in-memory databases. I'm left wondering if this is really a best-practice or just something like an artifact of brevity in the documentation. I'd like to look into that further.

From my discussion with Jason Smith, I was left with the impression a uniquely named database would be desirable to potentially avoid accidental collisions with another thread that may happen to be using the same database name. For all I know, this situation may be unlikely given how customers use XNET, but it seems possible from what Jason said. I'll follow up on this.

[sjasonsmith]

It probably is best to stick with the naming that is mentioned in the NI-XNET documentation.
The most common use for in-memory databases is going to be stream sessions where the database contents aren't extremely critical. For more advanced uses, I would expect most people to be opening databases from disk.