Cancel unconfirmed/stuck transactions?

[mhead]

Hi guys,
Please advise here. This is the first time in 3 yrs I've ever tried to make a btc transaction and the rules of the net seem to have changed since then regarding fees and so. Basically I tried to send a small btc amount just to get a feel of it before sending larger amounts to my BTC-trading account. Then I came to discover that I've probably given it too small fee (00001BTC/kb). The transaction got stuck in unconfirmed state over a day. So I googled for the solution to try to cancel the fee - apparently it could be done by using "zapwallettxes" function in Bitcoin Core that I'm using. Clearing the transaction from the wallet worked. I understand that I'm then supposed to use the very same input and send it with larger fee (this time I used the "Recommended: Normal" setting in BitCoin Core which at the moment generated 000047446BTC/kb fee) to some other btc addres and that way "override" the unconfirmed/stuck transaction from days before. It doesn't seem to be working. The old transaction is still there (https://blockchain.info/tx/8aec8cfe5128e0a618c256cea2a1139eb226c9b63abbcad49d9693edc1fce259) while the new one (with dcc24f374233d77b24774d3f76484a3764427104003ed16aecd30618652bbf94 ) is nowhere to be seen on blockchain.info (Sorry we could not find any blocks or transactions matching this hash
). Please help. I simply don't dare to send a single more btc before this clears out. Imagine if the similar problem happened with larger amount - I would go insane.

Any help is appreciated.

[ranochigo]

The command zapwallettxes merely removes the unconfirmed transaction from your client and the client will stop broadcasting the transaction. However, this does not mean that you can immediately spend the Bitcoins again. The reference nodes specifically prevents these by disallowing transactions from being relayed if the transaction is in the node's mempool.

Run -zapwallettxes again and leave the client for about 72hours. Once you cannot find your initial transaction (8aec8cfe5128e0a618c256cea2a1139eb226c9b63abbcad49d9693edc1fce259) on Blockchain.info or any other Block explorers, you can send the coins again.

[mhead]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I guess I can try that.
Basically what you are saying is that these double-spending (with higher fee) hacks that one can find here and there when googling for this issue aren't really working?

[ranochigo]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I guess I can try that.
Basically what you are saying is that these double-spending (with higher fee) hacks that one can find here and there when googling for this issue aren't really working?

They aren't hacks. Double spend, in the sense that having spending a coin twice and both confirms, can happen albeit rarely. What you are talking about is Replace-By-Fee. Currently, it does not work. UNLESS you specifically opt-in for it in your initial transaction and that is called opt-in RBF. Newer nodes will relay these if enabled.

If it is not enabled, nodes will refuse to acknowledge any transactions that spends the same inputs as a transaction that has been seen before by that node.

[Synthian]

Hi guys,
Please advise here. This is the first time in 3 yrs I've ever tried to make a btc transaction and the rules of the net seem to have changed since then regarding fees and so. Basically I tried to send a small btc amount just to get a feel of it before sending larger amounts to my BTC-trading account. Then I came to discover that I've probably given it too small fee (00001BTC/kb). The transaction got stuck in unconfirmed state over a day. So I googled for the solution to try to cancel the fee - apparently it could be done by using "zapwallettxes" function in Bitcoin Core that I'm using. Clearing the transaction from the wallet worked. I understand that I'm then supposed to use the very same input and send it with larger fee (this time I used the "Recommended: Normal" setting in BitCoin Core which at the moment generated 000047446BTC/kb fee) to some other btc addres and that way "override" the unconfirmed/stuck transaction from days before. It doesn't seem to be working. The old transaction is still there (https://blockchain.info/tx/8aec8cfe5128e0a618c256cea2a1139eb226c9b63abbcad49d9693edc1fce259) while the new one (with dcc24f374233d77b24774d3f76484a3764427104003ed16aecd30618652bbf94 ) is nowhere to be seen on blockchain.info (Sorry we could not find any blocks or transactions matching this hash
). Please help. I simply don't dare to send a single more btc before this clears out. Imagine if the similar problem happened with larger amount - I would go insane.

Any help is appreciated.

I also have this issue when I transferred bitcoin with a very small amount like you and I did a command in the console to remove that unconfirmed transaction the it took me nearly 4 days to complete. Therefore Don not send you bitcoin with too small fee. the transaction fee should be 0.0002btc

[ranochigo]

I also have this issue when I transferred bitcoin with a very small amount like you and I did a command in the console to remove that unconfirmed transaction the it took me nearly 4 days to complete. Therefore Don not send you bitcoin with too small fee. the transaction fee should be 0.0002btc

No, don't do that. Please use dynamic fee in Bitcoin Core. They are far more accurate and can almost guarantee it to confirm in the specific period of time you stated.

Using a static fee would be a really bad idea, even if its 0.0002BTC/KB.

[mhead]

* feels so rusty after 3 yrs absence from the BTC-concept*

What would be the "dynamic fees" in context of the Bitcoin Core client?
Would that be the option I mentioned earlier - "Recommended:  set to 'Normal' " ?
Is it worth to set it even higher up...like move the "lever" thingie to the middle or even farthest right "High"? Or am I always safe if it's set to Normal and my transactions will be confirmed within reasonable time (and _never_ end up in the limbo that I'm currently experiencing due 0.00001BTC/kb setting) ?

[ranochigo]

* feels so rusty after 3 yrs absence from the BTC-concept*

What would be the "dynamic fees" in context of the Bitcoin Core client?
Would that be the option I mentioned earlier - "Recommended:  set to 'Normal' " ?

Dynamic fees is basically the slider. It automatically adjusts the amount based on the network load and how fast you want it to confirm. That is the dynamic fee I am talking about.

Is it worth to set it even higher up...like move the "lever" thingie to the middle or even farthest right "High"? Or am I always safe if it's set to Normal and my transactions will be confirmed within reasonable time (and _never_ end up in the limbo that I'm currently experiencing due 0.00001BTC/kb setting) ?

I feel that normal would get me a confirmation in at most an hour or two but theres a scenario which could happen. Normal would almost certainly give you a confirmation in a maximum of 5 hours.
Block A is generated an hour after block B and your transaction was sent several minutes after Block A is mined.
- Since transactions are ranked on the fees/size, the number of transaction will accumulate more and more. The dynamic fee would not work as well and you may need to wait for the block that is generated after Block B.

It is solely based on your preference, but I would prefer to put it slightly above the normal if I need it confirmed by the next block.

[bitcampaign]

you just need to wait a maximum of up to 3 days or 2 days sooner

[sportis]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I guess I can try that.
Basically what you are saying is that these double-spending (with higher fee) hacks that one can find here and there when googling for this issue aren't really working?

They aren't hacks. Double spend, in the sense that having spending a coin twice and both confirms, can happen albeit rarely. What you are talking about is Replace-By-Fee. Currently, it does not work. UNLESS you specifically opt-in for it in your initial transaction and that is called opt-in RBF. Newer nodes will relay these if enabled.

If it is not enabled, nodes will refuse to acknowledge any transactions that spends the same inputs as a transaction that has been seen before by that node.

As I saw the post I would like you clarify if you have ever test the feature replace by fee; May I use this option with Electrum so to spend my bitcoins with smaller fees and If my transaction stucks to increase the fee? And how I know if miners don't accept the fees and I have to increase it?

[ranochigo]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I guess I can try that.
Basically what you are saying is that these double-spending (with higher fee) hacks that one can find here and there when googling for this issue aren't really working?

They aren't hacks. Double spend, in the sense that having spending a coin twice and both confirms, can happen albeit rarely. What you are talking about is Replace-By-Fee. Currently, it does not work. UNLESS you specifically opt-in for it in your initial transaction and that is called opt-in RBF. Newer nodes will relay these if enabled.

If it is not enabled, nodes will refuse to acknowledge any transactions that spends the same inputs as a transaction that has been seen before by that node.

As I saw the post I would like you clarify if you have ever test the feature replace by fee; May I use this option with Electrum so to spend my bitcoins with smaller fees and If my transaction stucks to increase the fee? And how I know if miners don't accept the fees and I have to increase it?

Yes, you can. You just have to check the box. Miners usually accept transactions with any fees/size but they are ranked from the largest to the smallest, with the largest being included in the block first.

If you see it unconfirmed for several hours, it is possible that your fee/size is too low. Just create another transaction with a higher fee spending the same inputs.

[sportis]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I guess I can try that.
Basically what you are saying is that these double-spending (with higher fee) hacks that one can find here and there when googling for this issue aren't really working?

They aren't hacks. Double spend, in the sense that having spending a coin twice and both confirms, can happen albeit rarely. What you are talking about is Replace-By-Fee. Currently, it does not work. UNLESS you specifically opt-in for it in your initial transaction and that is called opt-in RBF. Newer nodes will relay these if enabled.

If it is not enabled, nodes will refuse to acknowledge any transactions that spends the same inputs as a transaction that has been seen before by that node.

As I saw the post I would like you clarify if you have ever test the feature replace by fee; May I use this option with Electrum so to spend my bitcoins with smaller fees and If my transaction stucks to increase the fee? And how I know if miners don't accept the fees and I have to increase it?

Yes, you can. You just have to check the box. Miners usually accept transactions with any fees/size but they are ranked from the largest to the smallest, with the largest being included in the block first.

If you see it unconfirmed for several hours, it is possible that your fee/size is too low. Just create another transaction with a higher fee spending the same inputs.

Thank you very much ranochigo. I could be wrong but after some years from now when the reward from mining will not be enough for miners bitcoin users will think many times to spend or not their coins because of the transaction fees. In addition, if miners decide the transaction fees will be increased not only from transaction size as we know but also according the bitcoin price. Hi price less fees, low price more fees. 

[mhead]

Interesting. I removed the unconfirmed transaction from my wallet and indeed, after remaining unconfirmed for 2 days it disappeared from the Blockchain. But, several hours later it somehow reappeared on Blockchain in a newer block and actually got confirmed. 

[ranochigo]

Thank you very much ranochigo. I could be wrong but after some years from now when the reward from mining will not be enough for miners bitcoin users will think many times to spend or not their coins because of the transaction fees. In addition, if miners decide the transaction fees will be increased not only from transaction size as we know but also according the bitcoin price. Hi price less fees, low price more fees. 

Advancement in technology=better efficiency overall.
Higher Bitcoin price=lower transaction fee
Bigger block size= lower transaction fee.

Really, it isn't an issue AT ALL. Miners will still continue to mine the network. It would do them no good if they collectively decides to push the transaction fees up. It would only push people away from Bitcoin and the adoption rate would be much slower.

Interesting. I removed the unconfirmed transaction from my wallet and indeed, after remaining unconfirmed for 2 days it disappeared from the Blockchain. But, several hours later it somehow reappeared on Blockchain in a newer block and actually got confirmed. 

Not really strange. That miner may have seen your transaction and decided that your transaction can be in their block. The miner may have your transaction in their block for several hours and finally mined a block.