Low fee

[egoist]

Some of the funds in the wallet are not credited. It is written: "Low fee". How can this problem be solved?

[1715603468]

1715603468

[1715603468]

1715603468

[1715603468]

1715603468

[1715603468]

1715603468

[1715603468]

1715603468

[1715603468]

1715603468

[Welsh]

Depending on the version of Electrum you are running, then you could use  CPFP (child pays for parent). Check in your preferences whether dynamic fees is enabled, if not enable it. Go to your history of transactions and right click on the transaction with the "low fee" message and select CPFP. A slider will come up which you can then readjust the fee.

If you haven't got a version which supports CPFP, then you can always try out a free accelerator service, such as viabtc.

[GlobalProtection]

I have a real humdinger to solve.

I was sent a transaction for 102 mBTC

It arrived in a pending state in my wallet with the notation "low fee" next to it.

When I bring up the child pays for parent I get these numbers:

Total size: 65643 btyes

Input amount: 102 mBTC

Output amount: -339.1923 mBTC

Fee:  441.1954 mBTC

---------------------

No way am I going to pay a fee of 441 mBTC for sending 103 mBTC.

Help me clear this up so I can get my 103 mBTC without paying too much.

Thanks,

G.P.

[HCP]

Simply put, you can't clear it up. It looks like you received funds from a transaction that included a LOT of inputs and/or outputs... The transaction data size was 65,643 bytes!!?!

For reference, a simple transaction of 1 input, 1 output and a change address is only 226 bytes!

There is nothing you can do except pay the fee, wait, try your luck with an accelerator like ViaBTC or ask the sender to try an RBF transaction and resend with a better fee!

[GlobalProtection]

"try your luck with an accelerator like ViaBTC"

There is not suppose to be any luck. The blockchain is supposed to work with our trust in the technology to work correctly.

The price of bitcoin is going to collapse if this kind of nonsense takes place with others and word gets out.

If I have further payments sent to a different wallet will that make a difference?

Please help  me so this does not happen to me again.  Thanks a million.

Thanks

[GlobalProtection]

Also, is it possible that a company who is sending out mass payments would cause all those large sized inputs and outputs?

Also, what is an RBF transaction?

More tips needed.

Thanks

[GlobalProtection]

Can someone please tell me where I can find the accelerator?

Thanks

[GlobalProtection]

There is nothing you can do except.....ask the sender to try an RBF transaction and resend with a better fee!

Are you saying that even if the coin is showing in my wallet with the words "low fee" next to it, the sender can actually claim the btc again and resend it to me?

[pooya87]

There is nothing you can do except.....ask the sender to try an RBF transaction and resend with a better fee!

Are you saying that even if the coin is showing in my wallet with the words "low fee" next to it, the sender can actually claim the btc again and resend it to me?

as long as these transactions are not confirmed the sender can technically double spend them. this is why it is suggested to only accept confirmed transactions.
as for double spending, it is harder if it is not an RBF transaction which will show up as "replaceable". and if it is RBF, then the sender can simply increase the fees by double spending the same transaction.

[GlobalProtection]

What happens if I just wait?  Will the transaction go through sometime in the future?

Thanks

[bob123]

Payments should only be regarded as completed when the TX at least recieved 1 confirmation.

What happens if I just wait?  Will the transaction go through sometime in the future?

This depends on the fee paid and if the transaction is going to be rebroadcasted after being unconfirmed for several days/weeks.
You could look the transaction up in this blockexplorer: https://blockchain.info/ and add ?format=hex at the end of the URL afterwards.
Then copy the hex transaction. Afterwards you can try to broadcast/push this TX into the network when it has been dropped (if this is going to happen at all).
To push the TX after it has been dropped you can either use core or an online service[1].

[1] https://blockexplorer.com/tx/send or https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/pushtx/ or https://blockchain.info/de/pushtx, more can be found via google.

[GlobalProtection]

Payments should only be regarded as completed when the TX at least recieved 1 confirmation.

What happens if I just wait?  Will the transaction go through sometime in the future?

This depends on the fee paid and if the transaction is going to be rebroadcasted after being unconfirmed for several days/weeks.
You could look the transaction up in this blockexplorer: https://blockchain.info/ and add ?format=hex at the end of the URL afterwards.
Then copy the hex transaction. Afterwards you can try to broadcast/push this TX into the network when it has been dropped (if this is going to happen at all).
To push the TX after it has been dropped you can either use core or an online service[1].

[1] https://blockexplorer.com/tx/send or https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/pushtx/ or https://blockchain.info/de/pushtx, more can be found via google.

You said:  ".... it depends on the fee paid......"

If the fee is four times of the amount that was sent, does that guarantee the transaction is dead in the water?

Also, who is responsible for me being charged four times the amount sent?  The sender only charged 2% to send the transaction at least that is what they have listed as their fee, but I also notice that inside of the electrum client it has a sliding scale of fees, and that is set right in the middle in my client.  So is it possible that something within the electrum system went haywire and that is why these ridiculous charges happened to the btc transfer I was to receive?

[GlobalProtection]

I need to take this out to a wider audience of people for advice if this can not be solved today on this thread within this section of the forum?  It is possible that none of the electrum developers would admit this charge of four times the amount sent was the fault of electrum?  So that is why i have to bring this outside of this section of the forum to assure I get more objective answers.  Thank you.

Please see post above for more questions.  Thanks to the experts who come on here and help.

Anyone know the username of an electrum developer on this forum who would be responsible for the electrum system?

[GlobalProtection]

Posted on blockchain.info:  The Bitcoin network is currently experiencing record usage, resulting in longer confirmation times and higher miner’s fees for transactions. Transactions are likely to be more expensive and/or take longer to complete and additional fees go directly to miners.

Do you mean to tell me that the miners could be at fault for charging me thousands of times more than what is usually acceptable?

The miners stole the btc from me?

How do I get the stolen fees back from the miners?

Thank you

[bL4nkcode]

Do you mean to tell me that the miners could be at fault for charging me thousands of times more than what is usually acceptable?

The miners stole the btc from me?

How do I get the stolen fees back from the miners?

Thank you

Its not the fault of the miners, they don't stole your btc and they have nothing to do with that, wallets are design to compute the recommended fee so it can be confirm faster base on the current situation of the network and based on your inputs/output of your previous transaction. 65643 bytes is pretty huge size you might have so many small amount of transactions(inputs/outputs) before thats why you experiencing this.

[GlobalProtection]

wallets are design to compute the recommended fee so it can be confirm faster base on the current situation of the network and based on your inputs/output of your previous transaction. 65643 bytes is pretty huge size you might have so many small amount of transactions(inputs/outputs) before thats why you experiencing

Are you sure that wallets when receiving transactions have something to do with the amount that is charged to the transaction?  I know that you can set the fees in wallets when sending transactions but I did not know that they had any influence over the fees when receiving transactions.


Can someone who knows settle these questions please.


Thank you,


G.P.

[GlobalProtection]

......wallets are designed to compute the recommended fee so it can be confirmed faster. Based on the current situation of the network and based on your inputs/output of your previous transaction. 65643 bytes is pretty huge size you might have so many small amount of transactions(inputs/outputs) before and that's why you are experiencing this.

Are you saying that the electrum wallet messed up the transaction so I was charged four times the amount of the btc that was sent to me?  Did the wallet do these inputs and outputs which caused the fees to be so high?

[HCP]

No... receiving wallets have NOTHING to do with the fees charged for a transaction. The fees paid are set at the time that the transaction is created and sent.

Electrum did not and cannot have had ANYTHING to do with any fees charged for a transaction that you received!

CPFP is simply a function whereby you attempt to "spend" your unconfirmed, received coins in a brand new transaction with a GIANT fee in an attempt to get miners to confirm the parent and the child together (miners cannot confirm a child unless the parent is confirmed)... this is why when you attempt to do the CPFP in Electrum it shows such a large fee.

It does not help that your transaction was over 65,000 bytes... Without being able to see the actual transaction (you have not provided a transaction ID), most of this is "guesswork"... but given that the transaction was over 65,000 bytes... it either had a LOT of inputs or a LOT of outputs... or both!

I'm *guessing* that wherever you received your 0.102 BTC from... they have "batched up" a lot of payments to several users... and are shifting a LOT of inputs around in one transaction. Attempting a CPFP would mean that in affect you are attempting to pay the fees for ALL the payments to ALL the users, not just yourself.

Given that a "standard" input is usually around 148 bytes... an an output is around 34 bytes... let's pretend the sender used 400 inputs... that gives up 148 * 400 = 59200 bytes... and we'll say they paid 100 people... that gives us 34 * 100 = 3400... so we're at something like 62,600 bytes, which is pretty close.

In effect, if you attempted to do a CPFP, you would be paying the fees to cover all 100 people getting their money, this is why the CPFP fee is so outrageous. CPFP was not really designed with covering the fees for "pay to many" transactions, nor for transactions with a ridiculously large data size

If I were you, I would seriously reconsider doing business with whomever it was that created this transaction... sending a 65+Kilobyte transaction is just ridiculous... especially if it got stuck, they obviously cheaped out on fees

[jerry0]

Hey all.  What are your thoughts on sending btc with a very low fee... then using via bitaccelator?

[Spendulus]

I have a real humdinger to solve.

I was sent a transaction for 102 mBTC

It arrived in a pending state in my wallet with the notation "low fee" next to it.

When I bring up the child pays for parent I get these numbers:

Total size: 65643 btyes

Input amount: 102 mBTC

Output amount: -339.1923 mBTC

Fee:  441.1954 mBTC

---------------------

No way am I going to pay a fee of 441 mBTC for sending 103 mBTC.

Help me clear this up so I can get my 103 mBTC without paying too much.

Thanks,

G.P.

First of all, establish that the size=65643 is actually correct.

Do you know how to do that?