Unconfirmed Transactions Problem

[hv_]

Transaction time 1-2 days -> you can use bank tx..

High fees. -> you can use bank tx...


Block size usage to hard limit  ratio = 1 ->. There will be always cheap spam attacks possible ( why not launched by bank supporters?) so bank txs are not spammable.  -> you can use bank tx...

Of course we can use banks for various reasons.  We weigh our options and we choose which to use based on a variety of factors. 

Bitcoin provides some things that banks don't provide, correct? 

We have expectations regarding bitcoin in the present, as compared with banks and future expectations, too.  So we may take a position in bitcoin and watch its development based on our investment and the direction that we think either is going in respect to the other, no?
 

Wake up guys and fix it and reinstall some of the most important bitcoin features.

Wake up who?

Who to fix what?  What are they to fix?  What is broken?

What are "the most important features" in bitcoin and had those "most important features" been 'uninstalled?"  Who did it?  Did they do it in the dead of the night or based on consensus?

I m  happy for today and want to thank you a lot since I have some faint idea now about spam...
I very hope SW comes along with BU features and we can be happy for next years!

[1714987776]

1714987776

[1714987776]

1714987776

[1714987776]

1714987776

[matt4054]

As long as the absolute value of your transaction is high enough, the relative value-to-fee ratio stays low even if you have to go over 100 sat/B.

However, lower value transactions will become more and more affected as the race for block space goes on.

[hv_]

As long as the absolute value of your transaction is high enough, the relative value-to-fee ratio stays low even if you have to go over 100 sat/B.

However, lower value transactions will become more and more affected as the race for block space goes on.

Yep and you will only know after if you fall into the 'spammer bin' or not. Come on what a crap is that?

[JayJuanGee]

Transaction time 1-2 days -> you can use bank tx..

High fees. -> you can use bank tx...


Block size usage to hard limit  ratio = 1 ->. There will be always cheap spam attacks possible ( why not launched by bank supporters?) so bank txs are not spammable.  -> you can use bank tx...

Of course we can use banks for various reasons.  We weigh our options and we choose which to use based on a variety of factors. 

Bitcoin provides some things that banks don't provide, correct? 

We have expectations regarding bitcoin in the present, as compared with banks and future expectations, too.  So we may take a position in bitcoin and watch its development based on our investment and the direction that we think either is going in respect to the other, no?
 

Wake up guys and fix it and reinstall some of the most important bitcoin features.

Wake up who?

Who to fix what?  What are they to fix?  What is broken?

What are "the most important features" in bitcoin and had those "most important features" been 'uninstalled?"  Who did it?  Did they do it in the dead of the night or based on consensus?

I m  happy for today and want to thank you a lot since I have some faint idea now about spam...
I very hope SW comes along with BU features and we can be happy for next years!

And, you've said nearly nothing with your snarky assertions.

[AgentofCoin]

As long as the absolute value of your transaction is high enough, the relative value-to-fee ratio stays low even if you have to go over 100 sat/B.

However, lower value transactions will become more and more affected as the race for block space goes on.

Yep and you will only know after if you fall into the 'spammer bin' or not. Come on what a crap is that?

Not true. You can know before you send your tx.
Just check the mempool and calculate the fees yourself before sending.

Bitcoin is the only "personal responsibility" payment and storage system that exists
and you are choosing to defer that responsibility for convenience. That is true crap.

[Wowcoin]

Its getting problem almost 3 days my withdraw in ccex is not comfirm that time i really need money so that i withdraw it tuesday evening but it comfirm it yesterday morning that is the worst thing happen that 3 days before the bitcoin comfirm.

[arransiv]

Its getting problem almost 3 days my withdraw in ccex is not comfirm that time i really need money so that i withdraw it tuesday evening but it comfirm it yesterday morning that is the worst thing happen that 3 days before the bitcoin comfirm.

You can try a double spend, just send the same value with a higher fee, well, if you have more bitcoins in your wallet, of course.

And well, why do you used a low fee?

[BitHodler]

Its getting problem almost 3 days my withdraw in ccex is not comfirm that time i really need money so that i withdraw it tuesday evening but it comfirm it yesterday morning that is the worst thing happen that 3 days before the bitcoin comfirm.

You can try a double spend, just send the same value with a higher fee, well, if you have more bitcoins in your wallet, of course.

And well, why do you used a low fee?

If you took the time and effort to read his post, then you would know that he has withdrawn coins from C-CEX, which means that there is no way for him to initiate a double spend transaction with higher fees.

If what he says is true, then the exchange is the one to be blamed as they most likely included a very poor fee.

That's why I find it a much better idea if people are given the option to up the fees at the time they perform a withdrawal. So far none of the exchanges I have used has done this.

[rottenfruits]

These do happen every once in a while, when there are spending attacks or sometimes just like that when there is plenty of txs and the block mining is slow, there is no thing much you can do other than using high fees and waiting for blocks I guess.

[JayJuanGee]

These do happen every once in a while, when there are spending attacks or sometimes just like that when there is plenty of txs and the block mining is slow, there is no thing much you can do other than using high fees and waiting for blocks I guess.

I have the sense that this thread was not really about solving the transaction delays from a few days ago with a larger fee, even though some posters had been proposing that providing a higher fee could have partially solved their transaction delay issue.

I doubt that providing a higher fee would have solved the issue from a few days ago, because it seems as if the problem of the delays during that period was due to  some kind of spam attack on the network that delayed ALL transactions on almost an equal basis and no matter what the fees.  Sure, there may have been some outlier transactions that got processed, but for the most part, NO transactions were being processed. 

After about 30 hours, once the attack seemed to have been over (or addressed or gotten under control), then transactions began to go through and the back log of the mempool came back down to more normal levels, which came down pretty fast (about 12 hours or so), and thereafter transaction times returned to taking well under 1 hour with normal or even relatively low fees.

[mrcash02]

These do happen every once in a while, when there are spending attacks or sometimes just like that when there is plenty of txs and the block mining is slow, there is no thing much you can do other than using high fees and waiting for blocks I guess.

I have the sense that this thread was not really about solving the transaction delays from a few days ago with a larger fee, even though some posters had been proposing that providing a higher fee could have partially solved their transaction delay issue.

I doubt that providing a higher fee would have solved the issue from a few days ago, because it seems as if the problem of the delays during that period was due to  some kind of spam attack on the network that delayed ALL transactions on almost an equal basis and no matter what the fees.  Sure, there may have been some outlier transactions that got processed, but for the most part, NO transactions were being processed. 

After about 30 hours, once the attack seemed to have been over (or addressed or gotten under control), then transactions began to go through and the back log of the mempool came back down to more normal levels, which came down pretty fast (about 12 hours or so), and thereafter transaction times returned to taking well under 1 hour with normal or even relatively low fees.

Hmm, I just want the lowest fees again, Yobit increased the fee to 50K satoshis on that day. Don't know exactly if the delays happened because the excess of Bitcoin users or because the spam attackers, as you said now.

If it was an attack, the system would be better protect against this practice.

[genos]

Its getting problem almost 3 days my withdraw in ccex is not comfirm that time i really need money so that i withdraw it tuesday evening but it comfirm it yesterday morning that is the worst thing happen that 3 days before the bitcoin comfirm.

You can try a double spend, just send the same value with a higher fee, well, if you have more bitcoins in your wallet, of course.

And well, why do you used a low fee?

May be he didn't knew that the problem will be like this. If usually he can send bitcoin with low transactions fees, he never guess that the transaction will pending untill 3 days.
So from this problem, for the next transaction you can additional some more few cent fees to hasten your bitcoin confirmed.

[JayJuanGee]

These do happen every once in a while, when there are spending attacks or sometimes just like that when there is plenty of txs and the block mining is slow, there is no thing much you can do other than using high fees and waiting for blocks I guess.

I have the sense that this thread was not really about solving the transaction delays from a few days ago with a larger fee, even though some posters had been proposing that providing a higher fee could have partially solved their transaction delay issue.

I doubt that providing a higher fee would have solved the issue from a few days ago, because it seems as if the problem of the delays during that period was due to  some kind of spam attack on the network that delayed ALL transactions on almost an equal basis and no matter what the fees.  Sure, there may have been some outlier transactions that got processed, but for the most part, NO transactions were being processed. 

After about 30 hours, once the attack seemed to have been over (or addressed or gotten under control), then transactions began to go through and the back log of the mempool came back down to more normal levels, which came down pretty fast (about 12 hours or so), and thereafter transaction times returned to taking well under 1 hour with normal or even relatively low fees.

Hmm, I just want the lowest fees again, Yobit increased the fee to 50K satoshis on that day. Don't know exactly if the delays happened because the excess of Bitcoin users or because the spam attackers, as you said now.

If it was an attack, the system would be better protect against this practice.

First, fees are fairly dynamic, and they really are not very high - especially if you actually consider what bitcoin is and how much value you can transfer for a relatively low fee.  On the other hand, if you are transferring smaller values (let's say below $100), then the percentage of your transfer spent on fees is going to seem higher.   Fees are also something that you can frequently adjust to your level of urgency, and there a whole hell of a lot of folks who are paying lower than average fees and still having their transactions go through.



Second, I think that if you look at the mempool chart, it should be pretty obvious that the spike upwards and the spike downwards was not a product of "organic growth."

https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-size?timespan=1week

Third, as we understand bitcoin is both open source and a dynamic project that does not specifically reward contributors.  Accordingly, there have been a lot of attack vectors, and some of those attack vectors get sealed up and sometimes new attack vectors are discovered.  There can also be a certain level of balancing that causes some acceptance of attacks because sealing up some of the attack vectors would cost too much on users (for example some attack vectors could be sealed up by making fees higher and mandatory, but a large majority of folks will recognize that approach would not be good for the fundamentals of bitcoin).  So, yeah, there are ongoing efforts to attempt to protect against various attacks and even to identify if there is a decent way to deal with some attack vectors or to leave them alone because it would cost too much to attempt to seal such attack vectors with whatever remedy(ies) is (are) currently being proposed.

[seven2smoke]

Sometimes, Confirmations take a long duration.
I think, It's proportional with the amount of btc transferred
Anyways, At the end, It will be confirmed.

[Looarn]

Sometimes, Confirmations take a long duration.
I think, It's proportional with the amount of btc transferred
Anyways, At the end, It will be confirmed.

It's proportional to the number of "pending transaction", not the amount of BTC.
 https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions