BTC low fee taking days (or more)

[ufaiz50]

it's because price rises are making more and more bitcoin transactions with a low fee we have to wait for more than one day. Now we have to use a high fee to be able to speed up the transaction confirmation, increasingly popular bitcoin will be more and more problems in bitcoin

[bones261]

it's because price rises are making more and more bitcoin transactions with a low fee we have to wait for more than one day. Now we have to use a high fee to be able to speed up the transaction confirmation, increasingly popular bitcoin will be more and more problems in bitcoin

Yes, everyone want to move their BTC to exchanges for pump, dump and arbitrage action.

[bamboylee]

it's because price rises are making more and more bitcoin transactions with a low fee we have to wait for more than one day. Now we have to use a high fee to be able to speed up the transaction confirmation, increasingly popular bitcoin will be more and more problems in bitcoin

That is the only option we have for now. If we do not pay high enough fee, our transaction will be ignored for days. So I always follow the suggested fee my wallet is giving. It does not fail me to get my transactions confirmed, so far. I do not want to use those tx accelerator they are suggesting. I doubt it will work.

[rajasumi3]

It has been made according to priority .if u have lot of time for the transaction wait for it .but otherwise u have to pay a normal fee so that it is transacted quickly .the price of bitcoins have increased a lot and the price of transaction fees too.

[lightfoot]

This is an interesting issue. As a person who repairs bitcoin and litecoin miners for payment (in bitcoin), boosting the fees is annoying. You can say it will draw more miners, but that will simply increase the difficulty which will make each miner less effective which means no difference to the confirm rate.

You can raise fees, and that will make more money for miners, but that will simply bring in more miners which will increase the difficulty and make each miner less effective. Queen's race.

You can play the game of paying mining consortia to include your transactions in blocks, but that will just result in more consortia doing this, less confirmation of normal blocks, and more miners coming in which raises the difficulty which makes each mining consortia less effective. Queen's race again.

About the only people who profit are power companies. Invest in electric company stocks.

Another option: I'm going to start accepting payment in litecoin and see if I can convert that to bitcoin in large chunks, or buy some of my materials with ltc-cash. No problem confirming transactions there.

[AngryDwarf]

This is an interesting issue. As a person who repairs bitcoin and litecoin miners for payment (in bitcoin), boosting the fees is annoying. You can say it will draw more miners, but that will simply increase the difficulty which will make each miner less effective which means no difference to the confirm rate.

You can raise fees, and that will make more money for miners, but that will simply bring in more miners which will increase the difficulty and make each miner less effective. Queen's race.

You can play the game of paying mining consortia to include your transactions in blocks, but that will just result in more consortia doing this, less confirmation of normal blocks, and more miners coming in which raises the difficulty which makes each mining consortia less effective. Queen's race again.

About the only people who profit are power companies. Invest in electric company stocks.

Another option: I'm going to start accepting payment in litecoin and see if I can convert that to bitcoin in large chunks, or buy some of my materials with ltc-cash. No problem confirming transactions there.

Yes. And the fee market competition will continue until people have to start dropping off the BTC blockchain, as the fees become prohibitively expensive for all but the big UTXO movers, and the fee competition spiral means that even high fee transactions don't get confirmed because even higher fee incoming transactions push them out of the capacity queue.
Notice during the recent BTC pump, a few alt coins have pumped even better, which is not usually the case. Most of these altcoins aren't of the simple BTC clone type though. So it looks like traders are beginning to speculate on which coin may become a serious contender to the deadlocked BTC development issue.

[lightfoot]

Yes. And the fee market competition will continue until people have to start dropping off the BTC blockchain, as the fees become prohibitively expensive for all but the big UTXO movers, and the fee competition spiral means that even high fee transactions don't get confirmed because even higher fee incoming transactions push them out of the capacity queue.
Notice during the recent BTC pump, a few alt coins have pumped even better, which is not usually the case. Most of these altcoins aren't of the simple BTC clone type though. So it looks like traders are beginning to speculate on which coin may become a serious contender to the deadlocked BTC development issue.

Of course the next problem is going to be the BTC core nodes. I run one of those as a service to the network just to relay transactions, and it's requiring more and more disk space, memory, and cpu time to keep running. At some point people are going to get annoyed at the thought of storing every transaction forever for no pay.

Bitcoin is a perfect example of a pure perfect market. Even if you fix one section (double or quadruple the block size) it causes problems in other sections (ok, what about nodes who now need more disk and CPU)? Segwit has its own problems as well, as does inertia.

So what is the solution....

[kiklo]

Yes. And the fee market competition will continue until people have to start dropping off the BTC blockchain, as the fees become prohibitively expensive for all but the big UTXO movers, and the fee competition spiral means that even high fee transactions don't get confirmed because even higher fee incoming transactions push them out of the capacity queue.
Notice during the recent BTC pump, a few alt coins have pumped even better, which is not usually the case. Most of these altcoins aren't of the simple BTC clone type though. So it looks like traders are beginning to speculate on which coin may become a serious contender to the deadlocked BTC development issue.

Of course the next problem is going to be the BTC core nodes. I run one of those as a service to the network just to relay transactions, and it's requiring more and more disk space, memory, and cpu time to keep running. At some point people are going to get annoyed at the thought of storing every transaction forever for no pay.

Bitcoin is a perfect example of a pure perfect market. Even if you fix one section (double or quadruple the block size) it causes problems in other sections (ok, what about nodes who now need more disk and CPU)? Segwit has its own problems as well, as does inertia.

So what is the solution....

If BTC was a proof of stake / PoW coin , you could get paid for Processing Transactions for every block you staked, be about a ~$1000 per block at the current prices.
Plus whatever Block reward it received.
Or
Start a Master Node Service like Dash where the full nodes receive a % of the BTC PoW rewards.

Either of which would be more than enough incentive to run a full node.  

 

[AngryDwarf]

Yes. And the fee market competition will continue until people have to start dropping off the BTC blockchain, as the fees become prohibitively expensive for all but the big UTXO movers, and the fee competition spiral means that even high fee transactions don't get confirmed because even higher fee incoming transactions push them out of the capacity queue.
Notice during the recent BTC pump, a few alt coins have pumped even better, which is not usually the case. Most of these altcoins aren't of the simple BTC clone type though. So it looks like traders are beginning to speculate on which coin may become a serious contender to the deadlocked BTC development issue.

Of course the next problem is going to be the BTC core nodes. I run one of those as a service to the network just to relay transactions, and it's requiring more and more disk space, memory, and cpu time to keep running. At some point people are going to get annoyed at the thought of storing every transaction forever for no pay.

Bitcoin is a perfect example of a pure perfect market. Even if you fix one section (double or quadruple the block size) it causes problems in other sections (ok, what about nodes who now need more disk and CPU)? Segwit has its own problems as well, as does inertia.

So what is the solution....

If BTC was a proof of stake / PoW coin , you could get paid for Processing Transactions for every block you staked, be about a ~$1000 per block at the current prices.
Plus whatever Block reward it received.
Or
Start a Master Node Service like Dash where the full nodes receive a % of the BTC PoW rewards.

Either of which would be more than enough incentive to run a full node.  

 

The problem with most POS coins I have found is that only the big stakeholders hit a POS block. For everyone else, it just introduces inflation. Perhaps a 'Proof of Participation', aka rewards for running a full node is not a bad idea. But would the rewards be significantly larger than a transaction fee? I've outlined the basis of one idea of how to keep a fee market, without stupidly stuffing blocks to the limit earlier. I'm not  saying it is the right idea, but the current function is disfunctional.

[tambok]

It has been made according to priority .if u have lot of time for the transaction wait for it .but otherwise u have to pay a normal fee so that it is transacted quickly .the price of bitcoins have increased a lot and the price of transaction fees too.

And increasing in transaction fee is a normal thing even in any local remittances, the higher the value the higher the transaction cost is.
I doesn't matter anyway that the transaction fee is high as long as it is justifiable and the transfer is as fast as expected. But, of course it is better if it is fast and low transaction cost as well.

[AngryDwarf]

I've always found that paying the suggested 25 confirms fee displayed by bitcoin core is usually sufficient to get a confirm in a few blocks. But maybe not during a fee spike.
I once mistakenly sent a transaction with a low fee. The things just wouldn't confirm after weeks, despite several blocks not being full. The miners were not interested in it. Some block explorers did not show the unconfirmed transaction, whilst others had got it in there mempool.
I did a -zapwalletxes to cancel the transaction. Although eventually, up to a week or month later the transaction was rebroadcast by another node. So I zapped it again, waited a few days and then double spent it to invalidate the original transaction from rebroadcast. Just one reason why people should not accept zero confirms. Luckily the recipient didn't accept zero confirms so I didn't rip anybody off.
So whether your transaction will eventually get confirmed depends on the mempool settings of a few big mining pools.

[requester]

Yes I am too facing the same problem of not getting the transaction confirmed even after 24 hours also. so i think the time dead bitcoin is approaching soon and we should really do something for the problem.

[Zadicar]

Yes I am too facing the same problem of not getting the transaction confirmed even after 24 hours also. so i think the time dead bitcoin is approaching soon and we should really do something for the problem.

you are not the only one have this problem but all bitcoin users since these thing would really be a problem in longer runs.If there's lots of people do make transactions then expect that transactions would be more.

[Jemzx00]

You're not the only one experiencing this kinds of things. Since bitcoin transaction works faster only with higher fee putted into it. But sometimes there are cases that even with high fees and still ended up with longer time to be confirmed. This kind of things happens when there's a heavy traffic or maybe some things. But there are some way to push your transaction to be confirmed faster with the help of some sites which you can easily googled.

[nikona]

You could still have low fees and use the viabit accelerator. The accelerator works and I have tried it a couple of times now with great success. If you dont get to use the accelerator then with low fees it could take days, or the transactions will be reverted back to the original address.

[lightfoot]

You could still have low fees and use the viabit accelerator. The accelerator works and I have tried it a couple of times now with great success. If you dont get to use the accelerator then with low fees it could take days, or the transactions will be reverted back to the original address.

Of course. However when everyone uses systems like viabit you're back to square one. It's a classic Queen's race, where everyone runs faster and faster to stay in place.

[AngryDwarf]

You're not the only one experiencing this kinds of things. Since bitcoin transaction works faster only with higher fee putted into it. But sometimes there are cases that even with high fees and still ended up with longer time to be confirmed. This kind of things happens when there's a heavy traffic or maybe some things. But there are some way to push your transaction to be confirmed faster with the help of some sites which you can easily googled.

I believe bitcoin core has reintroduced RBF (replace by fee), allowing a user to slap a higher fee on the transaction. This is not available through the QT front end though, so it's probably a technical task.
But the thought of a market developing where transactions will not get confirmed by the mining consortia unless we use pay an intermediary to push things through is really going against the original decentralization fundamentals of bitcoin.

[Bitcoinsummoner]

With the price up and trading going up, fees are skyrocketing. Transactions a few days ago took hours which was too long. My now it's been 24 hours and still 0 confirmations. Besides the major annoyance and risk this causes, is there any way to fix BTC? I don't see it surviving unreliability.

Same as mine and i think we are not the only 2 are experience this i have transaction last few days ago and then before it gets confirm it takes a day  even i am paying a good amount of fee or 50k sat.. i hope they can fix this issue or i hope the fee will not increase more.. like before the fee is very less..

[AngryDwarf]

You could still have low fees and use the viabit accelerator. The accelerator works and I have tried it a couple of times now with great success. If you dont get to use the accelerator then with low fees it could take days, or the transactions will be reverted back to the original address.

Of course. However when everyone uses systems like viabit you're back to square one. It's a classic Queen's race, where everyone runs faster and faster to stay in place.

You can see the issue clearly. Eventually some people will have to drop out of Queen's race exhausted. So bitcoin adoption essentially stops or even shrinks.
Hopefully the community will stop playing sectarian politics and come up with a consensus solution.
I'm holding on to the bitcoin I've got now. If it forks, I'll hold on until I know what the successful fork is, but I don't think this is a good future for bitcoin. It's just even more confusion to help prevent mass adoption.
I'm now diversifying into a few alts just in case. But if I loose the lot because crypto becomes a failed experiment, I can live with that.

[bravehearth0319]

With the price up and trading going up, fees are skyrocketing. Transactions a few days ago took hours which was too long. My now it's been 24 hours and still 0 confirmations. Besides the major annoyance and risk this causes, is there any way to fix BTC? I don't see it surviving unreliability.

Even a thousands of bitcoin enthusiast faced this circumstance we can't do nothing about it but to accept the fact that every transaction were going to make in the blockchain is often delayed confirmations, though in the end still confirm into our wallet.