|
what version of electrum are you using?
|
|
|
|
|
why are you using a third party snap? it's unsafe. you should download bitcoin core from bitcoincore.org. untar that download and run bitcoin-qt from the bin directory. it's very easy.
|
|
|
|
|
you have to select the script type. modifying the derivation path will not do it. in fact you need not touch the derivation path at all.
|
|
|
|
|
there is no replaceable option on the send tab anymore. all outgoing transactions are replaceable by default and you can change this setting under preferences. so you should be able to bump the fee on this transaction. try long tapping it on android and see if that gives you the option.
|
|
|
|
|
usually this means that you're confusing mbtc with btc. you should change the default unit to btc under tools > preferences > general tab > base unit option. then attempt to send coins again this time keeping in mind that you are dealing with btc and not mbtc.
|
|
|
|
Apparently, OP sent a large transaction with 11 inputs and 142 outputs. One of those outputs, was his address from Electrum.
Man read the rest of that post: I've got an address with a single transaction with 11 inputs and 142 outputs. Is this something worth consolidating?
In electrum preview spending from that address with max selected, it shows 1 input 1 output. Will this be the new input/output values of the address if I send max?
What are optimal input/output values for an address as it would relate to fees in the future when it's spent?
Spending max from that address is showing just one input. He's been reusing addresses or he's otherwise confused. Anyway the whole thing is likely a wild goose chase. |
|
|
|
|
there have been scam accusations against that site on this forum as well. it's definitely a scam operation.
|
|
|
|
I've got an address with a single transaction with 11 inputs and 142 outputs. Is this something worth consolidating?
In electrum preview spending from that address with max selected, it shows 1 input 1 output. Will this be the new input/output values of the address if I send max?
What are optimal input/output values for an address as it would relate to fees in the future when it's spent?
See this is why i said it's pointless. OP does not understand and that's the case with 99% of users who ask about consolidating coins or whatever. @OP You've been reusing addresses and that's why over time you've received many coins and spent many of them as outputs. Now you have just one unspent output (utxo) and that's why when you choose to spend from that address it creates a transaction with just one input which is the sole utxo remaining. I suggest that you not reuse addresses in future but there is no need to move your bitcoins around. The point of creating this thread was to get help and guidance to further educate myself. I fail to see what you find pointless. Perhaps you have not read the thread? lol i wasn't saying the thread is pointless. i'm saying consolidating inputs is pointless like i said above in my first post in this thread.
Next, you're incorrect. I have never spent from this wallet but I have generated multiple inputs (from a single source) for certain addresses. Because I've never spent, I've never reused any address where security or privacy are traded off.
If a) you've never spent and b) you've received multiple transactions to the same address then doing a max send from that address in electrum should not lead to a transaction with just one input. So not sure what's going on here. A spend from a specific address is where you go to the addresses tab (view menu > show addresses if you can't see it), right click on the address in question and choose spend from. Is that what you're doing? |
|
|
|
I have a HD wallet from BitcoinCore, and I suspect that there are some ways of tapping my wallet. I don't want to sign transactions with BitcoinCore. So I would like to import private keys into Armory and sign transactions offline. What do you mean tapping your wallet? Are you afraid someone is going to steal your coins? If so then they can do that as soon as you enter your wallet password which you will have to do to dump your private keys. I think your fears are irrational. |
|
|
|
Have you checked your bitcoin.conf file?  You can set some of the User Interface Options in there, like minimizetotray... and if it's set there as minimizetotray=0, it might set the ones in the GUI to be greyed out so that it can't be changed. But I'm kinda grasping at straws on this one tbh. A very strange issue indeed!  he deleted his data dir so the conf file went with it |
|
|
|
Fees are really high right now and since you didn't adjust the fee it sent it with this high fee rate. Next time you should fine tune the amount you will pay: https://bitcoinelectrum.com/how-to-manually-set-transaction-fees/On chain transactions are expensive. That's why they are working on a second layer called lightning. It should reduce fees considerably. |
|
|
|
I've got an address with a single transaction with 11 inputs and 142 outputs. Is this something worth consolidating?
In electrum preview spending from that address with max selected, it shows 1 input 1 output. Will this be the new input/output values of the address if I send max?
What are optimal input/output values for an address as it would relate to fees in the future when it's spent?
See this is why i said it's pointless. OP does not understand and that's the case with 99% of users who ask about consolidating coins or whatever. @OP You've been reusing addresses and that's why over time you've received many coins and spent many of them as outputs. Now you have just one unspent output (utxo) and that's why when you choose to spend from that address it creates a transaction with just one input which is the sole utxo remaining. I suggest that you not reuse addresses in future but there is no need to move your bitcoins around. |
|
|
|
he's using coinbase at a merchant's site as a payment processor. if coinbase is happy you don't need to bump the fee. besides as you said yourself you can't afford to bump the fee.
it'll confirm in a week or so at the most.
What would happen if I had set the fewest fee? like 1 satoshi. Would I lose my money? But they would go where? Nowhere? it'll confirm in a week or two like i said. if you didn't want to wait you'd have to use your wallet to bump the fee so it confirms faster. here's a guide on how to do that: https://bitcoinelectrum.com/frequently-asked-questions/#my-bitcoin-transaction-is-not-confirming-what-can-i-do |
|
|
|
|
chaos = entropy so i'm thinking this is badly translated and he really does mean his seed mnemonic.
|
|
|
|
|
>I'd like to batch all inputs of that address and send the consolidated tx to the same address.
why? seems like a waste of money to do that
|
|
|
|
|
if coinbase is happy you don't need to bump the fee. besides as you said yourself you can't afford to bump the fee.
it'll confirm in a week or so at the most.
|
|
|
|
|
It's quite simple to get a non-bech32 address in bitcoin core 0.19.1. Just go to the receive tab, uncheck "generate native segwit address" and click "create new receiving address" to get a p2sh segwit one. So in the event that blockchain.com can't grok bech32 addresses you can send to a p2sh one.
|
|
|
|
@Abdussamad
I completely understand (and I made sure I understood that before I went to Bitcoin) that and I've done all my transactions with the wallet. Yet as TryNinja said, it seems one generates more private addresses than used because the total is bigger than the keys funded. I know this because when ask electrum for the value of the funded keys (i.e. sweeping) it generates fewer keys than my total but the value is equivalent to what I have in all my private keys.
When you sweep it's sending the funds to an address in the new wallet. So it's not incorporating the old wallet's private keys into the new wallet. They are called private keys btw and not private addresses. If you want to incorporate the old wallet's priv keys into a new wallet you have to create an imported private key wallet: https://bitcoinelectrum.com/importing-your-private-keys-into-electrum/ |
|
|
|
|
you're supposed to place the wallet.dat file before it syncs because when it's syncing its looking for transactions relevant to your wallet. so you place the correct wallet.dat file first.
if you did it afterwards core would have complained and asked for time to go through the chain again but since it didn't it must be what achow said above - you've placed it in the wrong dir.
|
|
|
|
But what happened to the coins that were in the private keys that were not 'funded'? Because the transactions record that coins went to that private address.
Or were they just amalgamated at some point in the course of transactions? I just want to make sure I didn't lose coins somewhere.
When you spend bitcoin some coins end up in change addresses so that's probably what happened: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Changehttps://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Coin_analogyThat's why we use wallet software to manage all this instead of dealing with raw private keys because there's a risk you will make a mistake and lose money. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
