From what I know, it's not possible to cancel an unconfirmed transaction. The closest thing would be a dojble-spend attack. Seeing as you sent it without a fee, it will most likely be returned to your wallet within a few hours/days.
No! OP is using bitcoin core. Core does not "return" transactions, it constantly rebroadcasts them if they have been created with the wallet. Just be patient and it'll come. On the other hand, it could confirm after a while but your only option right now is to wait and be patient. Always remember the fee, I know I've sent a few transactions without a fee and it took forever to get the Bitcoin transaction confirmed. Could you possibly post a txid so we could try to rebroadcast it or just check on the status?
A TX ID would be nice, yes. It will most likely show a low fee though.
@huberius you have two options #1 keep core open and hope the TX will get picked up. This will happen eventually, but it might take days or weeks. Its difficult to say without knowing the details of the TX. It might be possible to get a confirmation even without fee, depending on the priority. #2 remove the unconfirmed transaction from your wallet (more below) and wait another 24 hours so the rest of the network had a chance to forget about it. Create it again, this time with a higher fee. To remove the TX from your wallet (assuming you dont run a pruned node!) #1 close core #2 make sure its closed #3 start it with -zapwallettxes (make sure the spelling is correct), for windows you do this by: #3.1 opening run (win + r) #3.2 enter: c:\Program Files\Bitcoin\bitcoin-qt.exe -zapwallettxes (modify path if needed) #3.3 confirm with ok #4 core will forget about all transactions and rescan the local blockchain. This will re add all confirmed transactions, but not the unconfirmed one. |
|
|
|
I actually did not send the transaction , its beening sent to me. Is it an easy thing to do to increase the fee of an existing unconfirmed Transaction ?
In this case there is not much you can do besides withholding your part (if its a trade) until its confirmed. I think it would be best to talk to the sender and discuss which way you want to go. #1 keep reminding the network about the current TX and hope that it will get picked up eventually. I and others can help with that if you post the TX ID #2 Hope that the network forgets about the current TX so the sender can recreate the TX with a higher fee.
I actually did not send the transaction , its beening sent to me. Is it an easy thing to do to increase the fee of an existing unconfirmed Transaction ?
there's two ways. one makes it return to the sender's wallet and the other will need the sender to double spend it. basically it's up to the sender. you can only wait. Lol wouldn't it be hilarious if someone tried trolling you by sending you a payment with very low fee? You can try sending me some coins with a low fee if you want. |
|
|
|
cortexx066
1G2utWZJpUVc6XSQGiVAKkxmf7fTcGdyLR
|
|
|
|
|
As someone that fought ponzi OPs in the past and will so in the future under certain circumstances I applaud your effort, but I think its wasted. You may or may not see these as counter arguments. I dont really see them as such. They are my personal reasons why I no longer go around in that section and tag people. You can disagree with them without being wrong, they are at least partially subjective or based on my view on the world.
We have to assume people here are grown up. As such we further have to assume they did the proper research or are unable to do so. In either way, a negative rating will not affect them into rethinking their decisions. I see it similar to punishment and not as a consequence. A punishment can change behavior, but does not create insight or understand of the problem. The behavior is simply avoided openly in order to avoid the punishment. You as an external party can not create consequence for the ponzi, the ponzi OP and/or the "investors". A proper consequence would be loss, be that due to the ponzi OP running away or because "the round ended". Even though these consequences are constantly present, people keep "investing".
Any attempt to educate those you hate and distrust will not be fruitful, because you are unable to see their perspective and change it bit by bit to communicate yours. There is no interaction, but you create a barrier instead.
The flashy red warnings (we had them in the past, didnt we?) will like be reported and removed as spam (they did in the past, didnt they?). If not the ponzi operators can and will create self moderated threads to remove the posts.
This forum has a very non nanny state approach and while it creates things I dont like, I think many of these things have to be tolerated in a free society.
I personally draw my line when they advertise their ponzis outside their section, e.g. in their signatures and I will continue to mark those that do so.
|
|
|
|
-snip- kein FullNode mehr sonderen ein Zwischendingsbums  Kann man drüber streiten, ich würd sagen: Ist noch n full node, kann aber keine anderen Full Nodes mehr erschaffen. Es werden weiterhin alle TX und Blöcke geprüft und weitergeleitet oder eben nicht. Nur "alte" Blöcke werden nicht angeboten. Wenn man "full" in "full node" als "fully validating" versteht, hat man das auch mit weniger Blöcken auf der Platte oder Karte. |
|
|
|
I have learned that if anyone else send the push to priority then it may be more chance of getting confirmation, can you help me to push my transaction to priority. so that it can get confirmation soon. Pushing the transaction does not change its priority, it just makes sure the network does not forget about it. In your case I would argue you should wait for the network to forget about the TX and resend with a higher fee. |
|
|
|
|
Could it be to avoid a dust change output?
How large are the input(s) you use and how many you want to send?
|
|
|
|
I dont know if its an attack or just high demand, but its true there is a high number of TX waiting for a confirmation. People will have to step up on fees if they want to avoid waiting. $ bitcoin-cli getmempoolinfo
{
"size": 27281,
"bytes": 52437613,
"usage": 118470704,
"maxmempool": 300000000,
"mempoolminfee": 0.00000000
}
 |
|
|
|
I have 2 pending payments from 2 days ago , still 0 confirmations . What's possible to do ?
thanks
Payments to you? Nothing, but reminding the network about the transactions (rebroadcasting them) Payments you made? The same as above or let the network forgot about them and resend them with a higher fee. Can you post the transaction IDs and which wallet software/service you use? |
|
|
|
|
Chaining transactions after each other makes no sense. The idea behind this is "CPFP" (child pays for parent), but this is not commonly implemented by miners.
|
|
|
|
-snip- og isnt online at the moment, and i need to go in 30 mins.
ok, send me your address, i'll send you 0.0375 BTC with double fees(0.0002 BTC), you can either wait for the conf or you can choose to trust me, then you send me $17 PM. Then we do this again.
Thanks
Alright we will do 50/50 1EAFZnCQZFxBmerD3fiEuVXbHtb8CaSDMa BTW: OgNasty is invisible.. I used him before ;-) Hope this helps. I dont see how this is related to fake escrow PMs. |
|
|
|
can you do this on blockchain.info, stopping the broadcast or would you need a software to do this because I deposited small amounts of btc on a gambling account and it said I have to deposit more btc to play but I don't have anymore Support wont help either,
Anyway i can get around this?
Not with blockchain.info no, but they return your coins to you after 3 days IIRC. Alternatively you would have to export the private key into a different wallet (e.g. electrum). |
|
|
|
allright..
fact is: There are, after -rescan and -zapwallettxes,loading the complete blockchain again and so on, no btc in my wallet.. I guess my transaction is therefore not forgotten and cancelled by mempool.
Does it still show in the list of transactions? Did you update the a version that is no longer called "qt"? -zapwallettxes will not exist in <0.9 versions AFAIK. i would doublespend, but i never did this before and i read several threads about it.. seems not to be a perfectly safe way if you mess around the wrong way.. As yóu might already know: I'm no genius on this topic
If i double spent or receive the btc back is the same to me at this moment; i just want a safe way to get my disappeared btc back somehow..
edit: yeah, i learned now.. I payed a fee of 0.0001, will never ever go again with a fee lower than 0.01.. This whole thing i ruining my nerves so hard and isn't worth 1 or 2 bucks
edit: I found this "ERROR: CTxMemPool::accept() : nonstandard transaction type" like a thousand times in my debug window... should this mean the mempool declined my tx or accepted it?
I really hope someone understands what happened here and could help me out
The error has nothing to do with your transaction, its about transactions of others. Bitcoin core (again, newer versions) is good at estimating fees, 0.01 will almost always be too much. |
|
|
|
Also notice that the daemon's memory usage starts to grow tremendously 39843 nobody 15 22 2 6186M 1746M uwait 3 94.4H 0.00% bitcoind Probably because all those transactions are piling up. With an update to 0.12 you can limit the amount of RAM used for transactions (300 MB by default). |
|
|
|
-snip-
After a successful first week, we're now stopping the Free Tipster Competition signature campaign (we'll probably restart it at a later point in time).
removed it -> http://pastebin.com/sx9sfVUbwe can just add it again when you continue. |
|
|
|
Vielen Dank für die Info
Sagmal, wie würdest du den Node konfigurieren, was würdest du warum wie einstellen?
Würde gerne von deinen / euren Erfahrungen lernen.
Gruß
Willi
Das kommt drauf an. Mein VPS z.B. ist anders konfiguriert: server=1
daemon=1
-rpc zeugs-
maxconnections=42
disablewallet=1
dbcache=4
rpcthreads=1
prune=40000
minrelaytxfee=0.00002
um den Bedarf an Arbeitsspeicher zu reduzieren ist der dbcache auf den minimalen Wert gesetzt, die Wallet ausgestellt und die Anzahl der Verbindungen beschränkt. Sofern keine Problem bestehen oder Du bestimmte Sachen machen möchtest, würde ich erstmal bei den default Einstellungen bleiben. |
|
|
|
I think that a full reindex is slower and less reliable than anyone likes to admit to.
Its needed to fix certain errors, not sure what time frame you consider "slower than like to admit". 0.12.0 has changed some stuff which might index the chain differently enough to want reindexing.
In linux at a terminal,
after [file][quit] to stop bitcoin if it had autostarted at login,
bitcoin-qt -reindex -datadir=/home/username/.bitcoin &
You dont have to pass the default datadir. I'd expect that to run for three days straight on an average 3GHz quadcore such as an i5 with plenty (>=3GB) of RAM
Id expect <24 hours with 0.12. If that runs for a random length of time between an hour and a day before crashes, try moving (?deleting) /.bitcoin/database/ and /.bitcoin/peers.dat and then
bitcoin-qt -reindex -datadir=/home/username/.bitcoin &
Why delete the peers.dat? Also there is no /.bitcoin/database folder, are you refering to chainstate maybe? Once a reindex has completed, you can start BTC as normal at login or from its icon, and it remembers the location of your /.bitcoin/
As for how to speed things up, it is indexing every BTC transaction ever. Perhaps could someone comment on pruned nodes ?
Pruned nodes dont store the entire blockchain, but only a part of it. What exactly is your question?
Anyone know if there's any way to accelerate this reindex?
Get better hardware.  I think the setting the -dbcache=<n> where N is the size in megabytes of the cache to a larger size might make it faster. dbcache=4096 is a speedup, but it will result in core using ~5.5 GB of memory. I recently did a full sync in 8.5 hours[1] with 2/4 i5 cores on a mechanical disk. It significantly slows shutdown time though, so I wouldnt use that as a normal setting. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1357766.msg14008753#msg14008753 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
