Insanely high miner fees

[ranochigo]

Well, my wallet have 24 inputs (small amounts ranging from 10000 satoshi - 100000 satoshi). Does this contribute to the insanely high miner fee?

BTC Address : 1MMSZrmgcs6ucq2PgevN8YQjcxTb9BydnZ

Technically, no. The number of UXTOs you have in your address doesn't affect your transaction size at all. However, the more inputs and/or outputs you have, the larger the transaction size will be. With the larger transaction size, you have to pay more fee since miners go by the fees/byte.

[toygg]

How to check input and output?

[alani123]

How to check input and output?

If the transaction has been propagated you can check through a block explorer. Otherwise, it should be the job of your wallet to pick them in order to formulate a transaction.

[HCP]

Well, my wallet have 24 inputs (small amounts ranging from 10000 satoshi - 100000 satoshi). Does this contribute to the insanely high miner fee?

BTC Address : 1MMSZrmgcs6ucq2PgevN8YQjcxTb9BydnZ

That all depends on how much of the total balance you want to spend.

If you only want to spend 0.001, then you should be able to use just 1 input and 1 output (as your largest UTXO is 0.011)... and you'll end up with a transaction around 200bytes and can probably pay "just" 30000 sats fee (~150 sats/byte)...

However, if you are wanting to send all of it... well that is 24 inputs and 1 output...

worse case (Uncompressed key addresses) is: ((24*180) + (1*34) + 10) = 4388 bytes
best case (compressed key addresses) is:  ((24*148) + (1*34) + 10)) = 3596 bytes

Using the ((Inputs * 180 bytes) + (outputs * 34 bytes) + 10 bytes) formula for a guess at transaction size... Either way, with current recommended fees being well over 100 sats/byte, you're going to be looking at something like 500,000 sats (0.005) to send your 0.01 with "recommended" fees... yes, ~HALF of your balance as a fee.

Your other option is to wait until the mempool count is really low, like at least under 10,000 unconfirmed transactions... stick in a fee of at least 10sats/byte and try using ViaBTCs TX accelerator... and then just wait and hope.

In the meantime, I suggest you stop collecting dust... it is only going to make things worse for you... see if the people sending you these amounts can collect them into a minimum payout amount of like 0.001 or higher.

[farharhadi]

f its cost is very high is there anybody want to mine?

If it is me, the important result is its equivalent that has been issued.

[buwaytress]

This "too many inputs" concept itself is absurd. What the fuck it has to do with the inputs in the first place? Why did they design it that way?

So if a merchant who sells hundreds of coffees every day for 5$ and accepts bitcoins as payment basically has no choice but to get fucked? Sounds retarded.

A bunch of $5 payments will end up with a reasonable fee. It's when you try hundreds of $.01 payments that you'll end up with massive fees. Bitcoin was never designed to be a micro-payment network.

I'm not sure every time someone points that out... when Bitcoin was first designed, it didn't even cost a cent, and yet foresaw that it needed 100 million smallest units (satoshi), allowed for large batch transactions, and LN also provides support for sub-satoshi payments. What on earth would all that be needed for if they did not consider the possibility for micro payments?

[Decoded]

https://blockchain.info/tx/37737b363c94389dd165cbcbb2649be7901d303e2f62e236fc71001a841c4283

Looks it will never be confirmed, would be nice to have an option to cancel it instantly and send again.

That option does exist. There is an opcode for allowing transaction to be replaceable. I don't know of any wallets that let you use it however.

Electrum already has "Replace By Fee" implemented... and I'm fairly sure that I have seen it in action once or twice... but I've never used it myself. Granted, it doesn't actually work "instantly"... and isn't even guaranteed to work at all... but is better than having your transaction sit around for days.

Your other option is "Child Pays For Parent"... basically you use the output of the first unconfirmed transaction in a second transaction with a MASSIVE fee (big enough to pay for both the first and second transactions) and the miners will include both to claim the "prize"

Your wallet tries to put your transaction as a high priority one based on current market standards. You coyld always pick a different wallet that'd let you pick smaller fees by hand but that wouldn't guarantee transactions confirming on a timely manner.

It isn't really the wallet trying to put it as a high priority. It is because there are multiple dust transactions included that push the transaction data size up (in MrCash02's case to 962 bytes, a "standard" transaction is around 226 bytes). As fees are determined on a satoshi per byte basis. The more bytes you have (ie. the more space in a block your transaction takes) the more you will pay in fees.

This is why a transaction for 100 BTC that has 1 input and 1 output can be sent with a fee of only 0.0005 BTC (~160 sat/byte at 226 bytes) and confirm fairly quickly. But a transaction for only 0.01 BTC that has like 10 inputs (ie. a bunch of faucet dust) and 1 output will need a fee of around 0.0016 BTC (~160sat/byte at 1024 bytes) to confirm in the same timeframe.

People need to realise it is NOT the "value" of the transaction that determines the fee required... it is the "data size" (ie. how many inputs and outputs)

Well, my wallet have 24 inputs (small amounts ranging from 10000 satoshi - 100000 satoshi). Does this contribute to the insanely high miner fee?

BTC Address : 1MMSZrmgcs6ucq2PgevN8YQjcxTb9BydnZ

From what I can see, the fee would have been relatively high, but not as high as 0.003. it should have been around 0.0005-0.0015. Maybe the network was especially congested at the time? If you try resending it now, does Jaxxwallet come up with the same fee?

[toygg]

Well, my wallet have 24 inputs (small amounts ranging from 10000 satoshi - 100000 satoshi). Does this contribute to the insanely high miner fee?

BTC Address : 1MMSZrmgcs6ucq2PgevN8YQjcxTb9BydnZ

That all depends on how much of the total balance you want to spend.

If you only want to spend 0.001, then you should be able to use just 1 input and 1 output (as your largest UTXO is 0.011)... and you'll end up with a transaction around 200bytes and can probably pay "just" 30000 sats fee (~150 sats/byte)...

However, if you are wanting to send all of it... well that is 24 inputs and 1 output...

worse case (Uncompressed key addresses) is: ((24*180) + (1*34) + 10) = 4388 bytes
best case (compressed key addresses) is:  ((24*148) + (1*34) + 10)) = 3596 bytes

Using the ((Inputs * 180 bytes) + (outputs * 34 bytes) + 10 bytes) formula for a guess at transaction size... Either way, with current recommended fees being well over 100 sats/byte, you're going to be looking at something like 500,000 sats (0.005) to send your 0.01 with "recommended" fees... yes, ~HALF of your balance as a fee.

Your other option is to wait until the mempool count is really low, like at least under 10,000 unconfirmed transactions... stick in a fee of at least 10sats/byte and try using ViaBTCs TX accelerator... and then just wait and hope.

In the meantime, I suggest you stop collecting dust... it is only going to make things worse for you... see if the people sending you these amounts can collect them into a minimum payout amount of like 0.001 or higher.

I have been collecting many micro payment from faucet android apps. The mining fee is 0.0032368 btc to send 0.0688584 btc which is insanely high.

[HCP]

I'm not sure every time someone points that out... when Bitcoin was first designed, it didn't even cost a cent, and yet foresaw that it needed 100 million smallest units (satoshi), allowed for large batch transactions, and LN also provides support for sub-satoshi payments. What on earth would all that be needed for if they did not consider the possibility for micro payments?

The LN was designed for exactly this reason... to move micro payments offchain.

From what I can see, the fee would have been relatively high, but not as high as 0.003. it should have been around 0.0005-0.0015. Maybe the network was especially congested at the time? If you try resending it now, does Jaxxwallet come up with the same fee?

Do the math... at best case his 24 inputs will only require 148bytes (if they all use compressed key addresses)... 24 inputs * 148 bytes + 34 bytes output + 10 bytes = 3596 bytes....even using btc.com's estimate of only 75 sats/byte... that still equates to 269700 satoshis (0.00269700). bitcoinfees.21.co is saying 180... which would make it 647280 sats (0.00647280)....

I have been collecting many micro payment from faucet android apps. The mining fee is 0.0032368 btc to send 0.0688584 btc which is insanely high.

It isn't insanely high... you are trying to take up 0.3% of a whole 1M block for your one transaction... it is almost 15x the data size of a "normal" transaction (3596 bytes vs 226 bytes). Fees are based on data size of transaction, NOT bitcoin value.

STOP collecting dust... or accept that you are going to end up paying a large chunk of your faucet payments to move that money around.

For the record, there are only around 10K unconfirmed transactions in the mempool... if you want to gamble and try and transfer using a fixed fee, now is probably your best time (or even wait until it drops even lower, like under 5K)...

If your wallet (Jaxx?) doesn't support manual fees, then export your BIP39 seed, import it into Electrum, use manual fee and put in something like 50000 satoshis to make sure you hit the 10satoshis/byte minimum, mark it RBF (Replace By Fee), send it all in one go and then use the ViaBTC TX Accelerator to try and push your transaction through.

[toygg]

I'm not sure every time someone points that out... when Bitcoin was first designed, it didn't even cost a cent, and yet foresaw that it needed 100 million smallest units (satoshi), allowed for large batch transactions, and LN also provides support for sub-satoshi payments. What on earth would all that be needed for if they did not consider the possibility for micro payments?

The LN was designed for exactly this reason... to move micro payments offchain.

From what I can see, the fee would have been relatively high, but not as high as 0.003. it should have been around 0.0005-0.0015. Maybe the network was especially congested at the time? If you try resending it now, does Jaxxwallet come up with the same fee?

Do the math... at best case his 24 inputs will only require 148bytes (if they all use compressed key addresses)... 24 inputs * 148 bytes + 34 bytes output + 10 bytes = 3596 bytes....even using btc.com's estimate of only 75 sats/byte... that still equates to 269700 satoshis (0.00269700). bitcoinfees.21.co is saying 180... which would make it 647280 sats (0.00647280)....

I have been collecting many micro payment from faucet android apps. The mining fee is 0.0032368 btc to send 0.0688584 btc which is insanely high.

It isn't insanely high... you are trying to take up 0.3% of a whole 1M block for your one transaction... it is almost 15x the data size of a "normal" transaction (3596 bytes vs 226 bytes). Fees are based on data size of transaction, NOT bitcoin value.

STOP collecting dust... or accept that you are going to end up paying a large chunk of your faucet payments to move that money around.

For the record, there are only around 10K unconfirmed transactions in the mempool... if you want to gamble and try and transfer using a fixed fee, now is probably your best time (or even wait until it drops even lower, like under 5K)...

If your wallet (Jaxx?) doesn't support manual fees, then export your BIP39 seed, import it into Electrum, use manual fee and put in something like 50000 satoshis to make sure you hit the 10satoshis/byte minimum, mark it RBF (Replace By Fee), send it all in one go and then use the ViaBTC TX Accelerator to try and push your transaction through.

Does not seems to be correct since jaxx is showing me the miner fee costs 0.0002992 btc to send 0.0011 btc(biggest UTXO transaction in my wallet).

[jonald_fyookball]

jaxx should offer more flexibility with fees.   That being said , there's obviously a huge problem with high network fees in general.

[hello_good_sir]

I sent yesterday a transaction of 962 bits with a $0.50 fee and until now it didn't finish... I used that site https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ as reference, yesterday the spectative was to finish it maximum in a bit less than one day, now the spectative is "infinite"...

When this happen, no chance to finish the transaction, will it be canceled?

It doesnt work like that, in blockchain network your transaction are rejected only in special cases, but you can find all these transactions and block over here -->  https://blockchain.info/en/rejected
To make it easier for us to help you, I suggest pasting your transaction ID over here, we will be able to see what is exactly going on.

To avoid very high fees like that, you should notice to not send many payments with bitcoin dust, that will just increase the fee you will have to pay later.
I suggest stacking your money into bigger sums, to send them all in one transaction. You will save money, time and resources.

[HCP]

Does not seems to be correct since jaxx is showing me the miner fee costs 0.0002992 btc to send 0.0011 btc(biggest UTXO transaction in my wallet).

That is because if you try to send the whole 0.0011, the wallet will need to include other UTXO's to cover the fee... and as your other UTXOs are small, it needs to include a lot of them to be able to do that. That is why I suggested trying to just send 0.00100000.  That way, you have 10000 satoshi's to use as a fee... but I suppose even that wouldn't work, you'd need to send like 0.0009 or something.

Anyway, it looks like you managed to send it all... 44996bc2b9235fc374649c2f6b596547f8bf8e3c1073ef5fb68f8249a50809f5

as predicted, this transaction with all the dust UTXOs was HUGE by btc standards... Size: 3766 bytes... but you managed to get away with a 77 sat/byte fee... so it "only" cost: 0.00291648 BTC 


I hope you (and others following this thread) have learned a valuable (and expensive) lesson... try not to accumulate dust, it'll end up costing you more to move than it is worth... especially if fees keep going up!

[buharikx31]

In a previous version of blockchain they had a function to check inputs and outputs. Electrum provides the amount of inputs and ouputs and give the number of btc which you can pay, or wait for transactions to ease 

[Syke]

I'm not sure every time someone points that out... when Bitcoin was first designed, it didn't even cost a cent, and yet foresaw that it needed 100 million smallest units (satoshi), allowed for large batch transactions, and LN also provides support for sub-satoshi payments. What on earth would all that be needed for if they did not consider the possibility for micro payments?

It somewhat depends on what you consider micropayments. Micropayments were considered, but they weren't a focus of the design. Let's see what the designer had to say.

Bitcoin isn't currently practical for very small micropayments.  Not for things like pay per search or per page view without an aggregating mechanism, not things needing to pay less than 0.01.  The dust spam limit is a first try at intentionally trying to prevent overly small micropayments like that.

Notice how Satoshi is considering .01 as an overly small micropayment. We got people today expecting to transfer .0001 around without paying fees. That's 100 times smaller than Satoshi's micropayment. It may change in the future, but as of today, it's simply not how bitcoin was designed.

[ebliever]

Well, my wallet have 24 inputs (small amounts ranging from 10000 satoshi - 100000 satoshi). Does this contribute to the insanely high miner fee?

BTC Address : 1MMSZrmgcs6ucq2PgevN8YQjcxTb9BydnZ

If you ever notice a lull in network congestion and fees you might try emptying your wallet to a single address just to reduce the inputs down to one. Or wait for Segwit/LN/increased blocksizes to reduce the congestion.

[fathur.aza]

How much of that will be issued this insanely miners.

[cryptoanarchist]

Don't like the miner fees? Support bigger blocks.

[kurokishi10]

its not like there is something wrong with the wallet,it is common and this system is wrong.It depends on the no. of inputs and outputs craeated,in mycelium wallet it is 139 satoshi per byte at normal i.e. 30 mins,this is a huge amount even if u go to transact 3.7 usd it would take u 4.2 usd now imagine this for a 1000usd,this is the trend mate we need to rise against this

[HCP]

its not like there is something wrong with the wallet,it is common and this system is wrong.It depends on the no. of inputs and outputs craeated,in mycelium wallet it is 139 satoshi per byte at normal i.e. 30 mins,this is a huge amount even if u go to transact 3.7 usd it would take u 4.2 usd now imagine this for a 1000usd,this is the trend mate we need to rise against this

You seem to understand that is is about the inputs and outputs... but don't seem to understand how the fees are calculated? It has NOTHING to do with the "dollar" amount being sent in the transaction. It is purely related to "data size" of the transaction.

If you have a "standard" transaction with 1 input and 1 output... it will be around 192 bytes in size... I could be sending $1,000,000 worth of BTC or I could be sending $1 worth of bitcoin, it is still 192 bytes... and so if I pay the "normal" fee, it will cost 192 bytes * 130 sats/byte = ~25,000 satoshis...

Now, if you try to create a transaction like the OP did here, that has 20+ inputs because you've been collecting faucet payouts... all of a sudden, your simple transaction is now 3500 bytes or larger...

3500 bytes * 130 sats/byte = 455,000 satoshis... again, it doesn't matter if I'm sending 1000 BTC or 0.011 BTC, if the data size of my transaction is 3500 bytes because it has a lot of inputs and/or outputs in it, then the total fee required will be large.

Don't like the miner fees? Support bigger blocks.

If you don't like miner fees, support SegWit and help get the Lightning Network up and running... then you can start sending your dust size transactions around for minimal fees off-chain... and you're likely to never have to worry about the miners fees again