What will be done to solve the "transaction stuck" issues?

[Lionel]

More and more people complain about not only about high fees, but especially transactions stuck in the limbo ( even for 3 weeks or more... ).

I am sure there is something wrong with most wallet's mempool management, like they keep re-broadcasting the transactions forever even if it's clear that they are never gonna be confirmed, due to low fees.

But even if the devs cannot fix that, why they did not allow to do a Replace-By-Fee more than once?
If there was not such restriction, there would be no stuck transaction.
Many people happen to choose a low fee not only upon TX creation, but also when they issue a Replace-By-Fee they raise the fee but still not enough.
And after then they can't do anything.
 
----
Example tx: https://blockchain.info/tx/a7050759f3429363005f370c77814ce4a396f34faa6e081d7289f58ac89d834b
This one was sent the 6th Dec. and re-broadcast with Replace-By-Fee around the 19th Dec.  , but still with low fee.
At least 3 weeks have passed and i suppose it's lost forever.
Suppose the amount sent was not a few bucks but $15k !!
----

We talked about Segwit2x , but it's still not clear to me if it will be a new currency altogether, or a simple wallet update?

In the first case we are still not fixing the issues with Bitcoin, just asking the people to move to another currency and that's not a solution, because common people only know about BTC.

So my question is: will the devs just update the wallets instead of creating a separate currency/blockchain ?

[1713558328]

1713558328

[1713558328]

1713558328

[1713558328]

1713558328

[1713558328]

1713558328

[ranochigo]

I am sure there is something wrong with most wallet's mempool management, like they keep re-broadcasting the transactions forever even if it's clear that they are never gonna be confirmed, due to low fees.

Wallets in theory, don't have much control over the rebroadcasting of transactions. Literally anyone in the world can do it. Even if your wallet doesn't do it, it doesn't mean someone else won't.

But even if the devs cannot fix that, why they did not allow to do a Replace-By-Fee more than once?
If there was not such restriction, there would be no stuck transaction.
Many people happen to choose a low fee not only upon TX creation, but also when they issue a Replace-By-Fee they raise the fee but still not enough.
And after then they can't do anything.

Does it not? If you select Opt-IN RBF in the replacement transaction, it would be replaceable too.

If you issue a new transaction with a fee that is similar, then its not the developer's problem.

----
Example tx: https://blockchain.info/tx/a7050759f3429363005f370c77814ce4a396f34faa6e081d7289f58ac89d834b
This one was sent the 6th Dec. and re-broadcast with Replace-By-Fee around the 19th Dec.  , but still with low fee.
At least 3 weeks have passed and i suppose it's lost forever.
Suppose the amount sent was not a few bucks but $15k !!
----

No. As per Blocktrail, they have removed it from the mempool and it seems like the same with other block explorers. Have you actually tried to create a replacement transaction for it? Or are you just complaining for the sake of it.

Your Bitcoins cannot be lost.

We talked about Segwit2x , but it's still not clear to me if it will be a new currency altogether, or a simple wallet update?

New coin. Supposedly called off.

In the first case we are still not fixing the issues with Bitcoin, just asking the people to move to another currency and that's not a solution, because common people only know about BTC.

So my question is: will the devs just update the wallets instead of creating a separate currency/blockchain ?

We have been moving to a "new" coin for at least once already. The "update" can come in the form hard/soft fork and it just basically branches out from the chain with the new wallet version. Yes, forks are the solution.

There's zero issues with the wallet and its up to each independent developers/community to implement update. The Bitcoin "developers" are only in charge of the reference client.

[cr1776]

To answer the title question:
1. More people use segwit to enable more translations per block.
2. Lightning.

Ranochigo answered the rest.

[FireShark89]

To answer the title question:
1. More people use segwit to enable more translations per block.
2. Lightning.

Ranochigo answered the rest.

When lightning network is implemented, will it really be the solution to all the stuck transactions?? I honestly thought segwit would fix it.

[ranochigo]

When lightning network is implemented, will it really be the solution to all the stuck transactions?? I honestly thought segwit would fix it.

No. Lightning network will definitely help Bitcoin in terms of bringing down the total number of transactions since its an offchain solution. However, just like Segwit, users can choose whether to use it or not. The problem right now with the skyrocketing fees has to do with segwit's adoption, at least to some extent.

[bitcoinKnight809]

So it really is a problem then.. I see people trying to explain or even justify the high fees, but I'm sure what other users see is the inconvenience and that it's not worth it to transfer funds via Bitcoin...well, at this time

[Lionel]

@ranochigo
Thanks, i was not aware of the fact you need to flag as Opt-In RBF also the replacement transaction.

Then there actually is a way to avoid this issue, if you're careful enough.
You still have to pay a high fee but at least you can make it through.

@bitcoinKnight809
Indeed the inconvenience is there. One of the points of BTC was to be free from the high fees proposed by the banks and intermediaries ( Paypal, etc. ).
Now that point has been defeated.