Re: [PATCH] Extend the length of BackgroundWorker.bgw_library_name

Aleksander,

On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 1:01 PM Aleksander Alekseev <
aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:

> > The patch is backwards-compatible and ensures that bgw_library_name
> stays *at least* as long as BGW_MAXLEN. Existing external code that uses
> BGW_MAXLEN is a length boundary (for example, in `strncpy`) will continue
> to work as expected.
>
> There is a mistake in the comment though:
>
> ```
> +/*
> + * Ensure bgw_function_name's size is backwards-compatible and sensible
> + */
> +StaticAssertDecl(MAXPGPATH >= BGW_MAXLEN, "MAXPGPATH must be at least
> equal to BGW_MAXLEN");
> ```
>
> library_name, not function_name. Also I think the comment should be
> more detailed, something like "prior to PG17 we used ... but since
> PG17 ... which may cause problems if ...".
>

This is a very good catch and a suggestion. I've slightly reworked the
patch, and I also made this static assertion to have less indirection and,
therefore, make it easier to understand the premise.
Version 2 is attached.

--
Y.