OK, I created a new wallet and pasted the transaction ID into the required field. Electrum accepted it and when I went to broadcast it I got a error message stating:
"The transaction was rejected by network rules.(missing inputs)"
There is 1 input listed:
d70bd771...2e2aca5e:1 1BQZKqdp2CV3QV5nUEsqSg1ygegLmqRygj
Any ideas?
Thanks
That d70b...:1 doesn't seem to exist in 1BQZKqdp2CV3QV5nUEsqSg1ygegLmqRygj. I don't know how that could be possible when the tx was loaded from blockchain. Can you post the txid? |
|
|
|
|
Right click on a transaction in electrum and click broadcast. Rebroadcasting won't raise your fee, it will simply let nodes (that haven't heard about or have dropped your transaction) know about your transaction.
Edit:
Actually that doesn't work (the broadcast button is greyed out), you'll have to create a new wallet and go to Tools > Load transaction > From the blockchain and enter your transaction ID instead. The tx have to be unrelated to your current wallet for you to be able to broadcast.
Could've swore it worked with tx related to your wallet before.
|
|
|
|
How do you know that the blockchain is corrupted? The corrupted message normally comes with reindex prompt. To reindex manually, start core with -reindex command. There's a tutorial on how to do it for in various OS here. |
|
|
|
|
I'm getting the same problem here. Imported keys only.
I also noticed that I can't open some older versions anymore.
|
|
|
|
You click reply on the right hand side and either type something creative or just write "bump". Then you click post.
Remember, only bump your threads once every 24 hours and always delete old bumps.
Old bum means,old bump reply? Old bumps means your previous bumps in that thread. Try to have only one "bump" post and delete the rest. |
|
|
|
|
The whole point of bitcoin is to provide people a currency that have no central governance. If you don't like it simply don't use it.
|
|
|
|
No, blocks are needed for lots of things. It's the way bitcoin is made.
In the first place a node can have a different transaction from the rest of the network and won't have any way of knowing which transaction is conflicted for real if they don't download blocks.
Hi. Thank you. They would need to update the transactions. The same way today they need to keep the blocks updated. Not possible with the current implementation of bitcoin, sorry. |
|
|
|
Mining is also used as a consensus algorithm, if there's a fork on the network every node will choose the longest chain as the winning one. This makes it expensive to vote on a fork (by pointing your mining power towards it). If there were only nodes as a consensus algorithm, it would be "cheap" to create many votes and thus easy for a bad guy to abuse.
Thank you. But why would we need blocks if there wasn't double-spending problem? Nodes would only contain the transactions. No blocks, no forks. No, blocks are needed for lots of things. It's the way bitcoin is made. In the first place a node can have a different transaction from the rest of the network and won't have any way of knowing which transaction is conflicted for real if they don't download blocks. |
|
|
|
|
Transaction ID please. (Edit: Actually this probably won't help now.)
I'm guessing your tx was pruned by the server you're using because it took too long, making the transaction disappear from your wallet view. But the rest of the network still have the transaction and it ended up getting confirmed.
I'd refrain from making 4 posts in a row if I were you. Mods don't like that.
|
|
|
|
When i used electrum, the fee to send bitcoin was $0.06 or so. I did send bitcoin with no fee and it tooked very long so i stopped doing that.
When i use electrum now, its electrum 2.7.8, whenever i send bitcoin, the fee is $0.25 or so. Is that the default fee now? Is there a reason why the default fee for sending bitcoin with the old electrum was $0.06?
What do you have as the set default for your bitcoin sending fee? 0.0005btc/kb is what it is set to.
Does lowering it mean the transaction will take much lower?
What confuses me is why was the default fee $0.06 with the old electrum and now its higher?
0.0005btc/kb is the default fee. The fee is not fixed and will change depending on the size of your transaction and most transactions won't even reach 1kb. Lowering the fee will make your transactions take longer. In fact, 0.0005btc/kb is already lower than the recommended fee of 0.0008btc/kb. I'd recommend you increase the fee according to the recommended amount here (if it says "80 satoshis/byte" then use 0.0008btc/kb or if 100 satoshi use 0.001btc/kb). Or use the dynamic fee feature. |
|
|
|
Was this a deposit or withdrawal to bitsler? If it was a deposit, then it's not their responsibility. If it is a withdrawal, then it is.
I looked at the transaction, and it's part of a *very* long chain of unconfirmed transactions. All the transactions in the chain seem to have a reasonable amount of fees, and didn't see any of them doing anything stupid that would make them be non-standard. So I suspect it will resolve itself, or by easy to push through with rebroadcasting them (especially if done with a CPFP to speed it up).
yes, its a withdrawal. And it just popped up pending on my coinbase wallet so its making moves.. CPFP? Would I be able to cover the transaction fee or put a higher price to get it moving faster? 0.0002 of the 0.00025667 required to confirm it is a transaction fee by Bitsler It's already confirmed.  Now their transactions also gets propagated much better (from 50~ mempool with their txs to 800+). I think your complaint works. |
|
|
|
You'll to have to contact bitsler and tell them to rebroadcasts their transactions properly.
That transaction comes from unconfirmed transaction chain of 10 or more (scratch that. I stopped counting at 50.). They might get confirmed but it will take some time.
Took a quick look and I count more than 100 unconfirmed transactions from 39RUH3w83iz7JqZD3gB33HBMv3jMSn6moL. All badly propagated, all use 0.0002 fee.
I just submitted a complaint to Bitsler Support and now waiting for a reply. Besides that, I think all I can do now is wait? I mean it not like my bitcoins will disappear, right?. Also, I browsed through the Bitsler chatroom and there are others with the same issue. I'm glad to know that my bitcoins are not lost since you were able to locate the transaction through Tradeblock, so thank you for that! How is Bitsler responsible for this? I thought once a transaction is submitted, it's out of their hands. Sorry, I'm not technically keen with blockchain. All you can do is wait, yes. Bitcoins never disappear but the tx can. Tho if that happens bitsler can just create another transaction. Poor propagation can be caused by issues on their side when they broadcasted the tx. And right now they're the only one that can rebroadcasts all those transactions since sites that shows raw transactions doesn't have their transactions. |
|
|
|
|
You'll to have to contact bitsler and tell them to rebroadcasts their transactions properly.
That transaction comes from unconfirmed transaction chain of 10 or more (scratch that. I stopped counting at 50.). They might get confirmed but it will take some time.
Took a quick look and I count more than 100 unconfirmed transactions from 39RUH3w83iz7JqZD3gB33HBMv3jMSn6moL. All badly propagated, all use 0.0002 fee.
|
|
|
|
You're using 60 satoshi per byte fee and according to https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ it should confirm in between 5 minutes to 6 hours. Your tx took an unusually long time but it should confirm soon. Thnx for your reply. Is it possible it has something to do with de "capacity limit" of Bitcoin? I see almost all blocks reached 1 mil of bytes in size. Thats very worrying if that is the case or not? Shouldn't be if you pay the recommended fee (100satoshi per byte atm) or close to that. Higher fees increase miner's preference and you'll get faster confirmation. |
|
|
|
You're using 60 satoshi per byte fee and according to https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ it should confirm in between 5 minutes to 6 hours. Your tx took an unusually long time but it should confirm soon. |
|
|
|
If you're only sending from 161dqUpmLZ5qzkFZrzcaSQEStKBD3XYVrM however you'll just have to wait a little bit more (it's already possible if you use a full node). That is unless someone rebroadcast the 2 transactions.
Ok forget about the 14sWMKqX43Rdjr8kzqxjkKYc5h3MA79fuo What can I do about the 2 transactions from 161dqUpmLZ5qzkFZrzcaSQEStKBD3XYVrM , they are in limbo for 72 hours. I have made a double spend transaction to swipe the balance and send it to another address that should cancel the 2 pending TX, can somebody broadcast it successfully? Try https://blockr.io/tx/push . |
|
|
|
No, Look I have 3 unconfirmed transactions from 2 addresses.
What I am trying to do is to sweep the 2 addresses clean and send the money to a new address. It would cancel the 3 unconfirmed ones.
Then I will rebroadcast the 3 transactions into 1 merged one with big fee.
You won't be able to do that without a miner because the first input is still fresh and most likely exists in most nodes mempool. The new transaction will be rejected by every single one of them as double spend. Meaning you'll have to wait longer. Besides, the transaction from 14sWMKqX43Rdjr8kzqxjkKYc5h3MA79fuo paid 54 satoshi per byte fee. That won't take very long. If you're only sending from 161dqUpmLZ5qzkFZrzcaSQEStKBD3XYVrM however you'll just have to wait a little bit more (it's already possible if you use a full node). That is unless someone rebroadcast the 2 transactions. |
|
|
|
Not that one, the other TXs are the older ones, should I just double spend the other 2 without that one? 3977f189d1533a6519df92ea61aeef792434de939d620f7d11996561e273206e 73535a439f2ad97efa7998923a91bfbe4b11bd9338e048aa989b751a9e170179 ? That hex you posted spends an input from 633d4aa816d1c077375cea57f05f4a92010c3f52a753823989e820ec478d10fe:1 and edc498a5de0de762de2fbdc06758c87f5c893998a63bd4c4301588847421749b:1 . You got the input transactions wrong. Edit: Sorry. I misunderstood. You got the input right. But the first input doesn't have anything to do with those two transactions you posted so it's not needed and it won't get dropped by the network just yet (it'll probably confirm before that). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
