about high priority transaction

[lihuajkl]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

[Amph]

maybe there are no more transaction with an idle status so long that they can be considered high priority?

by digging around seems that the reaosn is that the 50kb reserved in each block for these transaction is now set to zero after 0.12 version

[deisik]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

As to me, just setting higher priority makes no particular sense

Besides, as far as I know, priority depends on how long a transaction hasn't been confirmed, and that might make some sense after all. Other than that, the only genuine measure that could objectively set the initial priority is the size of the fee itself. Really, if you want to prioritize your transaction and make miners actually pay attention to your needs, you prioritize it by making it more valuable for them to include it faster in the next block. In other words, you should put your money where your mouth is

[vnvizow]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

Well seems like these days the real "high priority blocks" are the ones the pools use to pay their miners

[LoyceV]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

This function is still active! But why would a miner pick someone who's sending a million dollars without a fee, if he can pick someone who's sending 5 bucks with 1 dollar fee? Of course the miner picks the transaction that earns him a dollar over the one that earns him nothing.
For the future when blocks might get bigger: Bitcoin Core 0.14 will deactivate this priority mechanism. (I only read this recently, I can't find back the source, so don't hang me on it)

[Carlton Banks]

Bitcoin Core 0.14 will deactivate this priority mechanism. (I only read this recently, I can't find back the source, so don't hang me on it)

0.14 makes removes some parts of age-based priority from the code, 0.15 will remove all of it. 0.15 will be out sometime summer 2017.

[ImHash]

Priority for sender and receiver but not for miners, only priority for miners is a transaction with the highest fee, time where miners gasped for some txs to include and those faucet big transactions were considered a fat bonus has past and are now a history.

[Lauda]

In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

The miners can choose to include transactions based on whatever metric they want. Alternatively they can also choose to not include any transactions.

Bitcoin Core 0.14 will deactivate this priority mechanism. (I only read this recently, I can't find back the source, so don't hang me on it)

0.14 makes removes some parts of age-based priority from the code, 0.15 will remove all of it. 0.15 will be out sometime summer 2017.

IIRC almost nobody uses it nowadays anyways.

Priority for sender and receiver but not for miners, only priority for miners is a transaction with the highest fee,
-snip-

Wrong.

[e-coinomist]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

Well seems like these days the real "high priority blocks" are the ones the pools use to pay their miners

Touché!

That's the "whatever metric they want" which seemingly isn't located inside the sphere of "public interest" which includes everyone of us.

[AngryDwarf]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

Well seems like these days the real "high priority blocks" are the ones the pools use to pay their miners

Touché!

That's the "whatever metric they want" which seemingly isn't located inside the sphere of "public interest" which includes everyone of us.

I think miners should include transactions according to the same consensus rule. Afterall, nodes validate their blocks on consensus, and people need to know that any transaction they send fits a consensus otherwise we will never know if a transaction will confirm because it might not match the miners configuration.

[deisik]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

Well seems like these days the real "high priority blocks" are the ones the pools use to pay their miners

Touché!

That's the "whatever metric they want" which seemingly isn't located inside the sphere of "public interest" which includes everyone of us.

It is the same in any field of human activity

People are doing something (or just anything) not because of some obscure "public interest" but rather out of their own private interests (thiugh that's normal). And miners are not an exception to this rule anyway (but this alone doesn't make them less evil, of course). Mining starts to serve public interests when competition kicks in so that miners can't raise their fees infinitely. But since competition in this field is close to being extinguished, we see all the ugly effects of a market which has been heavily monopolized

[Pursuer]

I think we should bring back the priority feature back to bitcoin once again. maybe we can even fight the spam transactions with this (to some extent not completely). franky1 had some comment about this.
but in the end it is up to the miners to implement this or not. and since miners are looking for more money I think even if block size was increased and it was empty they wouldn't prioritize low fee transactions as right now F2pool mines empty blocks if mempool is empty and there are high priority low fee transactions in it.

[Xester]

There used to be some room for high priorities transactions, which even don't pay fees and will be confimed in the blocks with other paying transactions. In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

Higher priority transactions are now useless and there is no room for that anymore. The ony thing that matters now are the higher fees that you set on your transaction so you can have a fast confirmation. Without a higher fee that is set  your transaction will not be prioritized. The only VIP in the network are those who have the capacity to pay a higher miner fee.

[franky1]

I think we should bring back the priority feature back to bitcoin once again. maybe we can even fight the spam transactions with this (to some extent not completely). franky1 had some comment about this.
but in the end it is up to the miners to implement this or not. and since miners are looking for more money I think even if block size was increased and it was empty they wouldn't prioritize low fee transactions as right now F2pool mines empty blocks if mempool is empty and there are high priority low fee transactions in it.

a new priority fee formulae doesnt have to mean zero fee's for everyone.

but the old fee formulae was more about calculating the value of the tx against the bytes. which if 'rich' enough you can counter the bytes and get priority. so ended up being a rich vs poor (in favour of the rich)

a new priority could be about not value.. but age, bytes and using the CLTV mechanism for people to voluntarily 'lock-in maturity' of up to 24 hours to say that if people are willing to spend less often they pay less.. if their tx's are leaner they pay less.
but if you bloat a tx and want to spend it every block it gets extremely expensive

where by those wanting to spend more often than 24 hours on a regular basis would then find it voluntarily beneficial to use second layer niche services (LN)

below is an example, although not perfect shows how bloat and respending to soon can be 'punishable' and being lean and displaying desire not to spam can be rewarding

as you can see its not about tx value. its about bloat and age.
this way
those not wanting to spend more than once a day and dont bloat the blocks get preferential treatment onchain.
if you are willing to wait a day but your taking up 1% of the blockspace. you pay more
if you want to be a spammer spending every block. you pay the price
and if you want to be a total ass-hat and be both bloated and respending often you pay the ultimate price

[freedomno1]

Bitcoin Core 0.14 will deactivate this priority mechanism. (I only read this recently, I can't find back the source, so don't hang me on it)

0.14 makes removes some parts of age-based priority from the code, 0.15 will remove all of it. 0.15 will be out sometime summer 2017.

Interesting do you have know where to find the update log for that the last I recall it was coinage that determined the priority of lower fee transactions.
Simply put older it was the less the txt
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees#Historic_rules_for_free_transactions

(Edit in:) Looked at the 0.1.2 log see where this was introduced

Bitcoin Core has a heuristic 'priority' based on coin value and age. This calculation is used for relaying of transactions which do not pay the minimum relay fee, and can be used as an alternative way of sorting transactions for mined blocks. Bitcoin Core will relay transactions with insufficient fees depending on the setting of -limitfreerelay=<r> (default: r=15 kB per minute) and -blockprioritysize=<s>.

 In Bitcoin Core 0.12, when mempool limit has been reached a higher minimum relay fee takes effect to limit memory usage. Transactions which do not meet this higher effective minimum relay fee will not be relayed or mined even if they rank highly according to the priority heuristic.

Seems like a bad adjustment in my opinion as it favors miners and fee gathering but does not account for people who rarely use the network to send and are not a big part of the bloat issue.

[ImHash]

In the mean time miners seems to only include the higher fee one in the blocks and ingore the high priority ones. What do you think about it? After the block is increased, will this function be activated again?

The miners can choose to include transactions based on whatever metric they want. Alternatively they can also choose to not include any transactions.

Bitcoin Core 0.14 will deactivate this priority mechanism. (I only read this recently, I can't find back the source, so don't hang me on it)

0.14 makes removes some parts of age-based priority from the code, 0.15 will remove all of it. 0.15 will be out sometime summer 2017.

IIRC almost nobody uses it nowadays anyways.

Priority for sender and receiver but not for miners, only priority for miners is a transaction with the highest fee,
-snip-

Wrong.

This is a quote from bitcoin.org

"Mining is the process of spending computing power to process transactions, secure the network, and keep everyone in the system synchronized together. It can be perceived like the Bitcoin data center except that it has been designed to be fully decentralized with miners operating in all countries and no individual having control over the network. This process is referred to as "mining" as an analogy to gold mining because it is also a temporary mechanism used to issue new bitcoins. Unlike gold mining, however, Bitcoin mining provides a reward in exchange for useful services required to operate a secure payment network. Mining will still be required after the last bitcoin is issued."

Now please bare with me and educate me on this particular matter, if mining isn't just including transactions in blocks then what is mining and why can't miners always mine empty blocks as what is stopping them?

You say I'm wrong but can you share any secret where we can convince miners to include our low fees transactions over the already available offers of users with paying higher fees? I meant priority for sender and receiver since when not having a fast confirmation isn't a priority? I wasn't talking about the priority of oldest coins back in the blockchain(days past-burning concept-determining whether someone is moving their own coins back and forth or coins are actually circulating).

[Lauda]

That's the "whatever metric they want" which seemingly isn't located inside the sphere of "public interest" which includes everyone of us.

Correct. Whoever assumes that all miners are genuine or working towards the common good is confusing Bitcoin with socialism.

Now please bare with me and educate me on this particular matter, if mining isn't just including transactions in blocks then what is mining and why can't miners always mine empty blocks as what is stopping them?

They lose out additional money, i.e. fees per  block. There are heavy debates on how much extra propagation time and risk adding TXs to a block includes than just mining an empty one. With empty blocks it is less likely that you're going to lose the 'race' to someone else.

You say I'm wrong but can you share any secret where we can convince miners to include our low fees transactions over the already available offers of users with paying higher fees?

That is it: You can't. The miners can't be forced by others to do what they like.

I meant priority for sender and receiver since when not having a fast confirmation isn't a priority? I wasn't talking about the priority of oldest coins back in the blockchain(days past-burning concept-determining whether someone is moving their own coins back and forth or coins are actually circulating).

There is a limit to all of this. They can only prioritize so much. I'm assuming that some miners already have *private* offerings for "premium seats" in their blocks.

[franky1]

You say I'm wrong but can you share any secret where we can convince miners to include our low fees transactions over the already available offers of users with paying higher fees?

That is it: You can't. The miners can't be forced by others to do what they like.

WRONG

i would do a lauda and not explain why..
but lets not be lauda.

miner CAN be forced.
add a new rule to node consensus of validating blocks..
EG
blocks need atleast 1500tx included or get rejected

[Lauda]

miner CAN be forced.
add a new rule to node consensus of validating blocks..
EG
blocks need atleast 1500tx included or get rejected

And this requires a fork, which needs support from miners, ergo you can't force them to do anything.

[0xfff]

miner CAN be forced.
add a new rule to node consensus of validating blocks..
EG
blocks need atleast 1500tx included or get rejected

And this requires a fork, which needs support from miners, ergo you can't force them to do anything.

If a majority of bitcoin users agree on a hardfork, miners will be left mining useless coin or move to mining the fork.  ???javascript:void(0);