On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 07:57:47AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> However, there are use cases where [potentially] longer names are
> expected/desired; for example, test benches (where library files may not
> [or can not] be copied to Postgres installation) or alternative library
> installation methods that do not put them into $libdir.
>
> 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.
I see that BGW_MAXLEN was originally set to 64 in 2013 (7f7485a) [0], but
was increased to 96 in 2018 (3a4b891) [1]. It seems generally reasonable
to me to increase the length of bgw_library_name further for the use-case
you describe, but I wonder if it'd be better to simply increase BGW_MAXLEN
again. However, IIUC bgw_library_name is the only field that is likely to
be used for absolute paths, so only increasing that one to MAXPGPATH makes
sense.
[0] https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BTgmoYtQQ-JqAJPxZg3Mjg7EqugzqQ%2BZBrpnXo95chWMCZsXw%40mail.gmail.com
[1] https://postgr.es/m/304a21ab-a9d6-264a-f688-912869c0d7c6%402ndquadrant.com
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
