Low fee

[HCP]

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

with current network conditions... you're essentially playing the crypto version of Russian Roulette

The network is so busy, and fees got so crazy that the ViaBTC service went from "busy" to totally overloaded. You used to be able to submit your transaction sometime in the first minute of a new hour and 99% of the time it would work. Now, if you're not in the first SECOND of a new hour, 99% of the time, you're going to get "submissions beyond limit".

[1715625788]

1715625788

[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.

On Christmas eve the 102 mBTC transaction went through and is appearing in the electrum wallet.  I do not know how it went through when the blockchain system was waiting on a fee of 441.1954 mBTC but it went through.

Can someone explain how it was cleared up or who could have cleared it up?  Whoever it was THANK YOU. That was a nice Christmas gift.  

[HCP]

On Christmas eve the 102 mBTC transaction went through and is appearing in the electrum wallet.  I do not know how it went through when the blockchain system was waiting on a fee of 441.1954 mBTC but it went through.

Can someone explain how it was cleared up or who could have cleared it up?  Whoever it was THANK YOU. That was a nice Christmas gift.

You're totally misunderstanding what the CPFP dialog was telling you... the blockchain system was NOT waiting on a fee of 441.1954 mBTC for your transaction to be processed. The CPFP dialog that said "fee required = 441.1954 mBTC" was just telling you that if you wanted to attempt a CPFP to give your stuck transaction "priority" a better chance of being included in a block, you should send the CPFP transaction with a fee of 441.1954 mBTC.

However, your original transaction was just sitting there in the mempool, waiting for a miner to pick it up an put it in a block. There was nothing stopping it from being picked up, just the odds of that happening were relatively low because of the low fee.

As for HOW your transaction got picked up with the low fee... as I've theorised, given the "LARGE" number of bytes that this transaction seemed to be, it was probably a "PayToMany" transaction... it is possible someone else either paid for it to be accelerated by an acceleration service, or THEY paid a large 441.1954 type fee to do a CPFP etc. and that is how the transaction got confirmed.

But, as always, without transactionIDs to work with... this is all speculation.

[GlobalProtection]

As for HOW your transaction got picked up with the low fee... as I've theorised, given the "LARGE" number of bytes that this transaction seemed to be, it was probably a "PayToMany" transaction... it is possible someone else either paid for it to be accelerated by an acceleration service, or THEY paid a large 441.1954 type fee to do a CPFP etc. and that is how the transaction got confirmed.

But, as always, without transactionIDs to work with... this is all speculation.

Are you saying that using transactionID knowledge I could figure out how this was cleared up?

[HCP]

Possibly... a good place to start would be identifying the block the transaction was included in... and which mining pool mined that block. If it was F2Pool, BTC.com, ViaBTC or AntPool... there is a possibility that someone got it accelerated.

By looking at the "children" of this transaction, you might find one that pays a ridiculously high fee... in which case, they may have attempted a "Child Pays For Parent" that worked to get it confirmed.