> 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.
