Title: Transaction
Post by: J3rk1e on December 24, 2020, 12:26:46 AM
Thanks
Title: Re: Transaction not showing up in the blockchain | Code: -26, Error:
Post by: Rath_ on December 24, 2020, 12:33:14 AM
Code: -26, Error: insufficient fee, rejecting replacement 90dd85ac13ba0d4d36794f4a066af9795a2c09d4fe1efea35873de893d2f7797; new feerate 0.00001010 BTC/kB <= old feerate 0.00001181 BTC/kB
The fee of your replacement transaction is too low. You cannot replace the previously broadcast transaction without increasing the transaction fee.
Title: Re: Transaction not showing up in the blockchain | Code: -26, Error:
Post by: FinneysTrueVision on December 24, 2020, 12:34:25 AM
You are trying to replace a transaction with a lower fee than the original trasaction. It needs to be higher.
Title: Re: Transaction not showing up in the blockchain | Code: -26, Error:
Post by: ranochigo on December 24, 2020, 03:59:31 AM
You have to calculate the feerate in terms of sat/byte to be greater than the value paid in the initial transaction.
The replacement transaction also have to have a greater total fee than the initial transaction and paying at least 1sat/byte more than the previous transaction. It will not work if you only pay 0.5sat/byte more than the previous transaction as the increment must minimally be the node's mintxrelayfee.
Title: Re: Transaction not showing up in the blockchain | Code: -26, Error:
Post by: nc50lc on December 24, 2020, 04:28:34 AM
Looks like the issue was solved, figured due to the address' blockexplorer history. But, anyone love to see some details? Here's some: It appears that he had replaced this 1.182sat/vB fee rate transaction: 27b60a104906256079236fafb7d62fb37208a26458ebd2258abcffc77a3d6453 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/27b60a104906256079236fafb7d62fb37208a26458ebd2258abcffc77a3d6453)with 5a624e5bcee5161217cf2d4dbe922c66b61d82d8fbc3820e2cfd4134f09d3afa (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/5a624e5bcee5161217cf2d4dbe922c66b61d82d8fbc3820e2cfd4134f09d3afa) that sent back the coins to his wallet, using the same address as the inputs. Then somehow the same inputs were used the first time he tried to send to bc1qk0fdr6cq8lt7qdlyl045nvjqmalkkzvfqs72n0. I suspect that the fee rate is just suggested by Bitcoin core's estimation. "inputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 601104,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 472021,
"prev_hash": "f43cbaccdf447369a4d9dd231dc087ca02b0526e00d91f0561a9544f4c90cc99",
"script": "473044022077154e42f100048dac1273bf624ed5d51abc696002fa440792eb59a9 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 590503,
"output_index": 1,
"output_value": 678529,
"prev_hash": "b4e218497a2500b99f1f849c744143af46fe7fd61ed381d195fd4213a2e714c3",
"script": "47304402206d34e2d861ddce65adb9e676db7375fddf734f2eaa76 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 585899,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 560621,
"prev_hash": "40736fe05bd2389d0a2a726a8acd747cd2c7ce84a3d98d497f247dff42dfa69d",
"script": "473044022018827c1ea7924ddc1405732d5163ac75c293ef9b1db881927f7a247916be6a -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 628291,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 5894754,
"prev_hash": "5148f6c2205a63c7ad768a50a32c12ef4828020fdbb6af7157947c1bcec23012",
"script": "47304402204ecb7886d6f97e8524ddeb12a318bef5eb40228beb78ac867d5d0e9df8fab8d8022 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 601120,
"output_index": 1,
"output_value": 472544,
"prev_hash": "f945edc32db2121b857483cd8c44a10056ca7c9cb6d34dfa1d0cc51507d8afdf",
"script": "4730440220670f430fd7ac269731d3750e888b7b3736bc9ac66c613f7fb2bd79abf2cb2abe02201fb8dc3 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 601104,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 431559,
"prev_hash": "cc1eb9247649a6663b3053781da61c671580f14748d070bbcbb084549d00ac91",
"script": "47304402201f9c65a8052bba8930ec5ee22d26f1e34c98228b958fd17f5cd4d008ba037130022015f2 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
},
{
"addresses": [
"17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND"
],
"age": 577958,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 2355860,
"prev_hash": "2b81fb9e1647d8b3621b82512f8fc6f66c0ea85e2e2603e7f2a315c4f36a238e",
"script": "47304402205a39f17302c16faf40acf82054655649fbd8e7d9432cf943e14486d6b19aadbb0220361a80 -snip-",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
}
],
"lock_time": 662285,
"opt_in_rbf": true,
"outputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"bc1qk0fdr6cq8lt7qdlyl045nvjqmalkkzvfqs72n0"
],
"script": "0014b3d2d1eb003fd7e037e4fbeb49b240df7f6b0989",
"script_type": "pay-to-witness-pubkey-hash",
"value": 10864580
} But the next attempt used the consolidated output of the previous transaction instead, that solved the issue as seen here: 17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/17mMVesSaC6kL4F8g5bA13u5iEvWc4ytND)
|