Bitcoin Forum
July 14, 2024, 07:58:37 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Mempool ATH - 140K unconfirmed transactions  (Read 1864 times)
leopard2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1014



View Profile
May 06, 2017, 10:12:28 PM
 #21

There you have it, digital gold.

If there was no deathly price attached to making it gold and digital cash (by switching to BU) I would say: Why not?

But BU, as is, hands over BTC to Bitmain and will result in blockchains that will grow several TB per year. Even with 1MB blocks we are better off.  Sad

Truth is the new hatespeech.
687_2
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 173
Merit: 105



View Profile
May 07, 2017, 07:10:36 PM
 #22

Thank goodness we have a 1MB anti-spam limit or this spam would really be bloating the chain!

+1

Bitcoin is working as intended. Serious transfers only.

Buy the dip with the security and privacy of your own wallet: use cross chain atomic swaps to trade Bitcoin, USDT, and Ether. Trades are secured and settled on-chain. https://sibex.io
Rakete4
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235
Merit: 100


View Profile
May 07, 2017, 09:18:12 PM
 #23

Most of the transactions in the mempool seem to be quite unimportant, considering the low fees in them.
Who wants to store all those new UTXOs in his RAM and the transactions on his harddrive permanently?
lionheart78
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2926
Merit: 1153



View Profile WWW
May 07, 2017, 09:39:43 PM
 #24

Most of the transactions in the mempool seem to be quite unimportant, considering the low fees in them.
Who wants to store all those new UTXOs in his RAM and the transactions on his harddrive permanently?

But these transaction definitely cost the users a higher fee since they have to outbid other users in terms of transaction fee in order to be confirmed first.  And probably the one in fault here (transaction fee picking) are the miner since they ignore transaction fee that have lower fee and just cherry picking those that have higher fees.  I am not complaining about the cost of transferring BTC but rather seen the fault on the miners that ignores transaction that have decent fees.

▄▄███████████████████▄▄
▄█████████▀█████████████▄
███████████▄▐▀▄██████████
███████▀▀███████▀▀███████
██████▀███▄▄████████████
█████████▐█████████▐█████
█████████▐█████████▐█████
██████████▀███▀███▄██████
████████████████▄▄███████
███████████▄▄▄███████████
█████████████████████████
▀█████▄▄████████████████▀
▀▀███████████████████▀▀
Peach
BTC bitcoin
Buy and Sell
Bitcoin P2P
.
.
▄▄███████▄▄
▄████████
██████▄
▄██
█████████████████▄
▄███████
██████████████▄
███████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀███████████████████████▀
▀█████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀

▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀
EUROPE | AFRICA
LATIN AMERICA
▄▀▀▀











▀▄▄▄


███████▄█
███████▀
██▄▄▄▄▄░▄▄▄▄▄
████████████▀
▐███████████▌
▐███████████▌
████████████▄
██████████████
███▀███▀▀███▀
.
Download on the
App Store
▀▀▀▄











▄▄▄▀
▄▀▀▀











▀▄▄▄


▄██▄
██████▄
█████████▄
████████████▄
███████████████
████████████▀
█████████▀
██████▀
▀██▀
.
GET IT ON
Google Play
▀▀▀▄











▄▄▄▀
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
May 07, 2017, 09:40:57 PM
 #25

Current version of BU is unacceptable (Asicboost).
The idea behind BU is trash, and it's proposal is highly dangerous (EC), and its code is trash as well. Ver can't even fund 1 proper group of developers apparently.

BU is not a solution of any kind.
Ah don't say that. If you are a Chinaman, holding the exclusive patent for ASICBOOST, and your problem is "How can I leverage that to control Bitcoin" then BU is the perfect solution  Grin
Good one. Cheesy

But BU, as is, hands over BTC to Bitmain and will result in blockchains that will grow several TB per year. Even with 1MB blocks we are better off.  Sad
I concur.

Bitcoin is working as intended. Serious transfers only.
You don't need 4 Exahashes worth of security for non-serious transfers anyhow.

Most of the transactions in the mempool seem to be quite unimportant, considering the low fees in them.
Who wants to store all those new UTXOs in his RAM and the transactions on his harddrive permanently?
Unfortunately, you can't really block them either which is why spam is effective as long as it pays adequate fees.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
jubalix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1022


View Profile WWW
May 08, 2017, 01:58:42 AM
 #26

I don't find this surprising nor a reason for celebration. This is caused due to several things:
1) Miners not following user/economy consensus by not implementing Segwit.
2) Increased usage demand.
3) Spam attack.

It is very easy to make the mempool go "crazy" if there is no more capacity within the blocks and the demand suddenly increases. Additionally, we shouldn't price fees in USD (as will do in this thread) due to the constant increase in the price.

Hooray for 220 satoshis per byte fees.
There's nothing wrong with that, and it won't likely change until we see Segwit getting adopted.

Theres no such thing as spam, if you can get a transaction included and pay for it its legit.

Admitted Practicing Lawyer::BTC/Crypto Specialist. B.Engineering/B.Laws

https://www.binance.com/?ref=10062065
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
May 08, 2017, 02:11:38 AM
 #27

I don't find this surprising nor a reason for celebration. This is caused due to several things:
1) Miners not following user/economy consensus by not implementing Segwit.
2) Increased usage demand.
3) Spam attack.

It is very easy to make the mempool go "crazy" if there is no more capacity within the blocks and the demand suddenly increases. Additionally, we shouldn't price fees in USD (as will do in this thread) due to the constant increase in the price.

Hooray for 220 satoshis per byte fees.
There's nothing wrong with that, and it won't likely change until we see Segwit getting adopted.

Theres no such thing as spam, if you can get a transaction included and pay for it its legit.

Spam are tx that are designed not for commerce but malicious intent.
If an address is pushing hundreds of txs to itself, while paying a reasonable
fee for block inclusion, in theory it is spam since it is not in accordance of
commerce exchange, but mempool bloating and meaningless block data.

Because some things are allowable by the protocol does not mean they are legit.
That just means that some malicious actions can not be reasonably constrained
currently. Your comment is equivalent to saying that "If I run red lights with my
car, but can afford paying the tickets/penalties, running red lights is fine/legit.".

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
Gens09
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
May 08, 2017, 02:27:47 AM
 #28

Just a normal transaction for a increasing bitcoin industry so basically that is just normal because the bitcoin holders are also increasing when the holders increase no doubt the transaction made also increase but thats a good sign in all bitcoin holders.
bitart
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 629


Vires in Numeris


View Profile
May 11, 2017, 08:50:55 PM
 #29

Just a normal transaction for a increasing bitcoin industry so basically that is just normal because the bitcoin holders are also increasing when the holders increase no doubt the transaction made also increase but thats a good sign in all bitcoin holders.
I doubt it, it should not be a normal increase, just because of the higher acceptance of bitcoin on the market...
In a few days time, we have jumped to 1 year maximum in mempool transactions, waiting for confirmation, see chart on blockchain info https://blockchain.info/en/charts/mempool-size?timespan=60days
The normal increase should not be exponentional but linear or just closer to linear. Japan can't be the only reason, too.
Something should be really going on, just besides the normal growth. We'll see sooner or later, anyway.
countryfree
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3052
Merit: 1047

Your country may be your worst enemy


View Profile
May 11, 2017, 10:27:16 PM
 #30

A peak of unconfirmed transactions is not alarming. What worries is that it doesn't go back to 0 after a while. We've had more than 40K unconfirmed transactions for 10 days. Something has to change. SegWit is probably the easiest solution to fix the problem.

I used to be a citizen and a taxpayer. Those days are long gone.
The One
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
May 11, 2017, 10:59:23 PM
 #31

Memory usage is now at 300mb with 140,000 txs.

And still not increasing the max blocksize is a great idea... cough cough.

..C..
.....................
........What is C?.........
..............
...........ICO            Dec 1st – Dec 30th............
       ............Open            Dec 1st- Dec 30th............
...................ANN thread      Bounty....................

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!