Clearing up the UTXO pool?

[s2]

I have a number of dust transactions that have been sent to my addresses which is just bloating the UTXO set and seems more costly to actually move these into usable money.
Is there any incentive yet to spend these and thereby reduce the utxo set?

I'm sure this has been discussed before but how about we make the rule such that

for every input, if the value is less than say 50x the smallest output the weight/cost for that input is considered 0.

This seems like a win/win for miners (reducing the utxo size) and users (they can gather the dust that may eventually be worth something).

Thoughts?

[1714989387]

1714989387

[1714989387]

1714989387

[1714989387]

1714989387

[1714989387]

1714989387

[ranochigo]

I have a number of dust transactions that have been sent to my addresses which is just bloating the UTXO set and seems more costly to actually move these into usable money.
Is there any incentive yet to spend these and thereby reduce the utxo set?

No.

I'm sure this has been discussed before but how about we make the rule such that

for every input, if the value is less than say 50x the smallest output the weight/cost for that input is considered 0.

This seems like a win/win for miners (reducing the utxo size) and users (they can gather the dust that may eventually be worth something).

Thoughts?

It shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly, if the input is 0.01BTC and you are trying to spend 0.5BTC, that input would be considered to have a size of 0?

Not possible. If you were to do this, there would be more incentive to have more spam. Miners don't gain anything from the reduction of UTXO, if this happens, they would simply lose revenue.

[s2]

It shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly, if the input is 0.01BTC and you are trying to spend 0.5BTC, that input would be considered to have a size of 0?

Not possible. If you were to do this, there would be more incentive to have more spam. Miners don't gain anything from the reduction of UTXO, if this happens, they would simply lose revenue.

I'm going to abandon that 0.0000001btc forever which means every bitcoin node around the world has to still continue to track this pointlessly forever, seems a waste of resources.

I see your point though that there is no incentive for the miners if the utxo size is irrelevant to nodes.

[Jet Cash]

I don't spend my Bitcoin. That means that anything I receive is going to sit in the UTXO set. I've considered "spending" them by sending them into a different wallet. Presumably that would take all of the small transactions out of the UTXO set, and hopefully speed up a future transfer for me. Why can't I include dust transactions in this consolidation?

[LoyceV]

I don't spend my Bitcoin. That means that anything I receive is going to sit in the UTXO set. I've considered "spending" them by sending them into a different wallet. Presumably that would take all of the small transactions out of the UTXO set, and hopefully speed up a future transfer for me. Why can't I include dust transactions in this consolidation?

You can include them, as long as the dust transactions are worth the fee they require to be sent.

I'm going to abandon that 0.0000001btc forever which means every bitcoin node around the world has to still continue to track this pointlessly forever, seems a waste of resources.

In the future, try to prevent receiving dust transactions. I use coin control and manual fee to make sure I don't receive very small amounts in change. If that happens, I just add it to the fee, which reduces the transaction size (as it has one less output).

I see your point though that there is no incentive for the miners if the utxo size is irrelevant to nodes.

UTXO currently holds just over 20 million addresses. It's not that much, and could fit in less than 1 GB RAM.

[Jet Cash]

You can include them, as long as the dust transactions are worth the fee they require to be sent.

If I'm transferring between my own wallets, and I don't care how long it takes to process the transaction, why can't I just lump them all together for a low fee? How much difference will a couple of dust transactions make?

[amaclin1]

I'm going to abandon that 0.0000001btc forever which means every bitcoin node
around the world has to still continue to track this pointlessly forever, seems a waste of resources.

Yes. This is how Bitcoin works.
Dont worry. There are thousands and thusands such dust abandoned outputs today in blockchain.

You can spend non-dust outputs from your addresses and publish the private keys.
May be sometime someone will combine them.

[LoyceV]

If I'm transferring between my own wallets, and I don't care how long it takes to process the transaction, why can't I just lump them all together for a low fee? How much difference will a couple of dust transactions make?

Miners prioritize transactions based on fee-per-byte, not total fee. Even if you use a very low fee, say 1 satoshi/byte, it's not worth sending anything under approximately 200 satoshi, as it will cost you more than the dust is worth.

You can spend non-dust outputs from your addresses and publish the private keys.

That's a risk: if someone reuses that address to pay you, or a new airdrop is based on a Bitcoin snapshot taken in the past, you lose that money.
Satoshi recommended never to delete a wallet.

[amaclin1]

Satoshi recommended never to delete a wallet.

This is not economically reasonable to keep old empty wallet and beleive that somebody will drop a penny in it.
Either in crypto or in real world