This question can't really be answered because several experts have been saying that the technological singularity is expected within the next 100 years, some saying it might even happen in a few decades from now. If everyone on earth focused on technological advancement to crack your passwords and algorithms, that singularity might even happen much earlier and with much higher probability. As a result, a super-intelligence might be able to find flaws in KeePass and its math, in ways that we cannot understand. In other words, you can't predict what would happen in 100 years if the whole world focused on this task, because other than being a totally unreasonable scenario, future technological development is too difficult to take into account. Even the development of KeePassXC is impossible to predict: will it still be maintained in 100 years? Changes today happen so fast that what will happen in 100 years is way beyond our comprehension. And just think what would happen if everyone focused on tech and science just to attack you, as you suggested.
Since your question can't be answered, the only relevant thing to point out as far as INFOSEC is concerned is that your threat model is completely wrong. A wrong threat model will lead to wrong questions and a false sense of security. Your threat model, in fact, is literally a joke. Why would the whole world just try to bruteforce your password, and not also try to hack your machine, spy on you, put backdoors in software or hardware, etc.? Especially considering that it would be very easy to hack you with those methods, 100% guaranteed. For example, the KeePassXC developers could put backdoors in the software. Or hardware manufacturers could do the same in their hardware. Or the plumber could put hidden cameras in your house. Or mathematicians could start to lie about AES, saying that it's been cracked and that everybody needs to switch to AES-improved, which is actually a faulty algorithm created on purpose just to hack you. All this would of course be possible and easy if everyone was really targeting you.
Tim Cook: From now on, everyone will be trying to bruteforce Tom's password! It will take millions of years, so let's start now, there's no time to lose!
Employee: Mr. Cook, why don't we just exploit the usual backdoor that we have been including in our OS since the 80's?
Tim Cook: No way, that's so unethical! The rule of the game is that we can only try to bruteforce the password. Or crack the algorithms in some way. Because Tom said so!
Employee: Oh, what a fun game! But I just started the script for bruteforcing, now what do I do? Just wait forever?
Tim Cook: No, you lazy ass! In the meantime, go get a math degree so then you can try to crack the encryption! And remember this is a worldwide effort, so remember to tell you mother and your grandma to do the same.
You see why your threat model is literally a joke? In the end, an "overly-secure" password is not more secure than a "normally-secure" password, because nobody is going to waste their time and energy for bruteforcing, without also considering alternative attacks. As shown in Mike Ounsworth's answer, your password is very secure, since a 49-char random password is expected to have more than 128 bits of entropy.