Are we stress testing again?

[jbrnt]

is looks likes things have slowed down, i wonder if they are trying to break the 200k transaction mark has all time high, i dont know if it was just me but i saw more the 200 transactions per second i thought is way 457 at peak.

What is the purpose of these "tests". Do they have a hypothesis to prove? Who coordinated them? These tests are happens too often. If there are more of them coming, they are attacks more than tests. 

[tss]

is looks likes things have slowed down, i wonder if they are trying to break the 200k transaction mark has all time high, i dont know if it was just me but i saw more the 200 transactions per second i thought is way 457 at peak.

What is the purpose of these "tests". Do they have a hypothesis to prove? Who coordinated them? These tests are happens too often. If there are more of them coming, they are attacks more than tests. 

the purpose of these tests is to create fear mongering amongst those ill informed or just plain too stupid to understand the issue at hand
they dont truly understand what the proposed changes would actually do for the bitcoin economy and blockchain.

those behind it have an agenda.  that agenda varies with who you ask.

its not an attack.  spam confirms less when there's more spam. 

[Quantus]

How big can the mempool get before it pops?

[OROBTC]

is looks likes things have slowed down, i wonder if they are trying to break the 200k transaction mark has all time high, i dont know if it was just me but i saw more the 200 transactions per second i thought is way 457 at peak.

What is the purpose of these "tests". Do they have a hypothesis to prove? Who coordinated them? These tests are happens too often. If there are more of them coming, they are attacks more than tests. 

the purpose of these tests is to create fear mongering amongst those ill informed or just plain too stupid to understand the issue at hand
they dont truly understand what the proposed changes would actually do for the bitcoin economy and blockchain.

those behind it have an agenda.  that agenda varies with who you ask.

its not an attack.  spam confirms less when there's more spam. 

Well, I disagree, I believe it IS AN ATTACK.  An attack upon all of us users.  Spam, or whatever you choose to call it, in this case is an attack.

I have no idea what the agenda is, but it is stressing a system needlessly.  And we will see this again in the future.

[Quantus]

ok guys get out your tin foil hats

In 55 weeks, 2 days, 11 hours, 10 minutes miners around the world will lose 50% of their income. Now imagine your the owner of a large mining pool. What would you do to make up for that loss in revenue?

More fees you say? How do we get more fees?

Whats that, you want to spam the network with spam to create a back log of valid transactions with reasonable fees so regular users have to pay more to use the network?

That's brilliant! and it won't cost us much because we get the fees back when we confirm the blocks with our spam. And now anyone who wants to use the network will be forced
to pay more! BRILLIANT!

[hund]

It's probably Gavins' minions to make you agree for the hostile takeover.

[JorgeStolfi]

Why are they testing again, didn't they prove their point the first time around?

Whatever they intended to prove, the previous test did not work: everybody claimed that the test validated their claims.

Maybe they are big-blockians trying to show what happens when the traffic exceeds the network's capacity.

Maybe they are small-blockians trying to justify the need for an "overlay network".  Or core devs who cannot wait for a chance to test replace-by-fee and other toys.

Maybe they are skeptics trying to get people to really understand the sentence "bitcoin cannot scale".

Or maybe they are indeed enemies trying to get people to abandon bitcoin for some altcoin...

[NorrisK]

ok guys get out your tin foil hats

In 55 weeks, 2 days, 11 hours, 10 minutes miners around the world will lose 50% of their income. Now imagine your the owner of a large mining pool. What would you do to make up for that loss in revenue?

More fees you say? How do we get more fees?

Whats that, you want to spam the network with spam to create a back log of valid transactions with reasonable fees so regular users have to pay more to use the network?

That's brilliant! and it won't cost us much because we get the fees back when we confirm the blocks with our spam. And now anyone who wants to use the network will be forced
to pay more! BRILLIANT!

That's quite the theory there.. The pools could even add transaction in a ratio compared to their hash power so they would get almost the exact amount back in fees in the long run..

[Mickeyb]

I made a transaction from localbitcoins.com yesterday.

https://blockchain.info/address/1HpaHwTwtk2BHQ7QRGPrvvG2KQm5F1vL4w

Still didn't go through. Is it possible that zhey payed only 0.0001 fee for all of this BTC sent?

[Quickseller]

No idea. Coinwalleteu was never heard from.


I have two conspiracy theories:

1. Blocksize politics

2. Either tradeblock.com or statoshi.info are behind this. They always show by far the largest values (tx/s and mempool size) and thus are always the sites that are referenced during these tests. It is a tremendous publicity for them.

I would say it is most likely #1, or at least it is more likely #1, then #2.

I don't think either trade block nor statoshi.info have very much to gain by doing this, and they probably are just better at accurately compiling blockchain data.

The people who are actively pushing for larger block sizes have the biggest incentives to execute these kinds of tests.

[Pony789]

I made a transaction from localbitcoins.com yesterday.

https://blockchain.info/address/1HpaHwTwtk2BHQ7QRGPrvvG2KQm5F1vL4w

Still didn't go through. Is it possible that zhey payed only 0.0001 fee for all of this BTC sent?

The tx fee is 0.0001211 btc and the tx size is 1211 bytes, so the sender is paying only 0.1 mBTC per KB.
From http://bitcoinexchangerate.org/fees, you can see there are a lot of transactions (nearly 15 MB) paying more fee than yours and are still unconfirmed.

[Mickeyb]

I made a transaction from localbitcoins.com yesterday.

https://blockchain.info/address/1HpaHwTwtk2BHQ7QRGPrvvG2KQm5F1vL4w

Still didn't go through. Is it possible that zhey payed only 0.0001 fee for all of this BTC sent?

The tx fee is 0.0001211 btc and the tx size is 1211 bytes, so the sender is paying only 0.1 mBTC per KB.
From http://bitcoinexchangerate.org/fees, you can see there are a lot of transactions (nearly 15 MB) paying more fee than yours and are still unconfirmed.

Well exactly that. I just cannot understand that one prominent business as that would do that. I mean stress test or not, a 0.0001 tx fee per transaction would be confirmed faster than this BS. And I need BTC urgently!

When can I expect this will be confirmed?
Thanks

[favdesu]

at least one of my tx was confirmed after several hours

stress test still going?

[Pony789]

I made a transaction from localbitcoins.com yesterday.

https://blockchain.info/address/1HpaHwTwtk2BHQ7QRGPrvvG2KQm5F1vL4w

Still didn't go through. Is it possible that zhey payed only 0.0001 fee for all of this BTC sent?

The tx fee is 0.0001211 btc and the tx size is 1211 bytes, so the sender is paying only 0.1 mBTC per KB.
From http://bitcoinexchangerate.org/fees, you can see there are a lot of transactions (nearly 15 MB) paying more fee than yours and are still unconfirmed.

Well exactly that. I just cannot understand that one prominent business as that would do that. I mean stress test or not, a 0.0001 tx fee per transaction would be confirmed faster than this BS. And I need BTC urgently!

When can I expect this will be confirmed?
Thanks

I guess you will need to at least wait for a few more hours. With a 1 MB block size, those 15 MB transactions will take at least 15 blocks to clear, and don't forget there are also new transactions in the mean time.

[favdesu]

I made a transaction from localbitcoins.com yesterday.

https://blockchain.info/address/1HpaHwTwtk2BHQ7QRGPrvvG2KQm5F1vL4w

Still didn't go through. Is it possible that zhey payed only 0.0001 fee for all of this BTC sent?

The tx fee is 0.0001211 btc and the tx size is 1211 bytes, so the sender is paying only 0.1 mBTC per KB.
From http://bitcoinexchangerate.org/fees, you can see there are a lot of transactions (nearly 15 MB) paying more fee than yours and are still unconfirmed.

Well exactly that. I just cannot understand that one prominent business as that would do that. I mean stress test or not, a 0.0001 tx fee per transaction would be confirmed faster than this BS. And I need BTC urgently!

When can I expect this will be confirmed?
Thanks

I guess you will need to at least wait for a few more hours. With a 1 MB block size, those 15 MB transactions will take at least 15 blocks to clear, and don't forget there are also new transactions in the mean time.

yep, if you want it faster setup a higher tx fee... could still take some hours to clear though

[machinationus]

Chug Chug the steam engine climbs the little hill...

Stress test shows any faults that are clear at present for any coins.

Just have a look at last 24 hours total trans is 200,000 is only 2.3 per second! It Should be 604 800 per day for 7 trans per sec.

1/3 of rate of programmers idea!    Here a website showing Trans per Minute just Divide by 60 https://chain.so/

What is wrong?

[bananas]

I don't get all the talking about miner's fee, we don't need to pay any fee at all if we don't want to and miners can leave if they want to.
If they leave the diffculty will be adjusted to the available hash power. We should not be held hostage of these mining corporations, mining could go back as low as the GPU days and it would not be a problem.

[pooya87]

i think it is time that developers do something about this issue, it is getting more and more annoying . the number of people being affected by this alleged stress testing is growing everyday.

i am not sure that bigger block sizes can be the solution to this problem, but something definitely needs to be done, and it needs to be done fast.

[bananas]

i think it is time that developers do something about this issue, it is getting more and more annoying . the number of people being affected by this alleged stress testing is growing everyday.

i am not sure that bigger block sizes can be the solution to this problem, but something definitely needs to be done, and it needs to be done fast.

Maybe some kind of rate limiting, and get rid of the fees that were supposed to avoid spam

[Pony789]

I don't get all the talking about miner's fee, we don't need to pay any fee at all if we don't want to and miners can leave if they want to.
If they leave the diffculty will be adjusted to the available hash power. We should not be held hostage of these mining corporations, mining could go back as low as the GPU days and it would not be a problem.

Why would the miners leave? What if they just ignore all the "low-fee" transactions? What could we, the bitcoin users, do except increasing the tx fee?

You are right that we could choose to not pay any fee if we want to.
But at the same time, the miners could choose to not include our transactions if they want to.