[Apr 2024] Fees are HIGH, wait for opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs

[JayJuanGee]

Surely you know more about this than I do, but I'm not so sure. Let's imagine I have 50 inputs of $100. If I merge them all into one input I lose privacy, which is one thing that is said in the OP.

Imho it's about how much you would usually spend at once, because you want to have such tx with one input.

So, if I don't usually spend more than $100, I shouldn't worry about it. What I don't know in the future if I could make a larger expenditure all at once.

On the other hand, you can consolidate anyway to be on the safe side, to avoid getting too easy small inputs later as change from the 100$ inputs when you spend 95$ of them. (and you spend before they become 500$)
I hope I was clear enough, not sure now how to say it better.

Well, with coin control and if I had many small change inputs (like $5) I would be more sure to consolidate them, but consolidate preventively is what I am not clear about, see if someone else helps.

I personally consider it to be a good idea to try to keep track of your transactions, and therefore, you should be ONLY combining like transactions..

so one way to divide them is KYC versus non-KYC...   .. and it could be more complicated to divide further, but there could be some kinds of cases that you might decide further kinds of divides, especially if you have some patterns in your own transactions and then you might be able to combine all of the like transactions that might come out of the same source... for example an exchange.. and maybe even some other third party that you deal with if you believe that you are not really given anything up when you combine them.  the more rigid you try to be, then the more complicated it might become to try to keep track, but if you largely deal in generic categories, then it might be a little easier to main some kind of a system of keeping separate but then sometimes combining them.. especially if you might have a whole bunch of small ones that you cannot really contemplate spending that way.. but another thing could be that you just leave the small ones alone because you already have some of your UTXOs that you know you would be able to use for larger transactions if such a need were to occur.

if in the next cycle I hypothetically wanted to pay for something worth $2,000 I guess there won't be much difference between 1 and 4 inputs as far as fees are concerned either, no? How do you see it?

I wouldn't count in dollars, but in Bitcoins. And I remember the days in 2017 when each (legacy) input added about 1 mBTC to the total fee. No matter what the Bitcoin price is, that's a lot, and 1 or 4 inputs would make a huge difference.

My take: It's a lot like cash money: $5 is convenient to buy a coffee, but it gets annoying already to pay for groceries for the week. Paying with a $10,000 bill would raise questions, and I wouldn't want the barista to know I own those ancient bills. So a bit of everything works for me.
Disclaimer: I've never seen a $10,000 bill. I do own a $10 bill though.

I remember quite a few bitcoiners back in the day (let's say 2014-2016) who used to sometimes consider having 1BTC as too small of an increment, so some of them were separating their coins into 10 BTC increments.. so surely that can become a problem. because even now 0.3 BTC is very close to a $10k bill.

Maybe some of those guys fixed their issues, but I have my doubts because some members do not want to be moving their coins around very much, so surely some of them might be getting into situations in which they would prefer to have some UTXOs with smaller amounts in them.

I have a "friend" who tends to rotate through various addresses, so even an address that has something like 0.3 BTC might end up getting used up over a year or two... that is if the goal might at one time be to exhaust certain UTXOs, but let's say this friend has several BIGGER transactions of $2k to $4k, and then he might have 30 different UTXos that have 0.3 BTC each, so instead of exhausting a couple of the UTXOs, he does the next 10 transactions from each of 10 of those UTXOs and then ends up having around 0.2 BTC in each of those 10 UTXOs that used to have 0.3 BTC... .but then he still has another 20 UTXos that have 0.3 BTC each... does not even sound like a first-world problem, but it does sound like it could be a problem for some bitcoin OGs.

[1714477432]

1714477432

[1714477432]

1714477432

[philipma1957]

Surely you know more about this than I do, but I'm not so sure. Let's imagine I have 50 inputs of $100. If I merge them all into one input I lose privacy, which is one thing that is said in the OP.

Imho it's about how much you would usually spend at once, because you want to have such tx with one input.

So, if I don't usually spend more than $100, I shouldn't worry about it. What I don't know in the future if I could make a larger expenditure all at once.

On the other hand, you can consolidate anyway to be on the safe side, to avoid getting too easy small inputs later as change from the 100$ inputs when you spend 95$ of them. (and you spend before they become 500$)
I hope I was clear enough, not sure now how to say it better.

Well, with coin control and if I had many small change inputs (like $5) I would be more sure to consolidate them, but consolidate preventively is what I am not clear about, see if someone else helps.

I personally consider it to be a good idea to try to keep track of your transactions, and therefore, you should be ONLY combining like transactions..

so one way to divide them is KYC versus non-KYC...   .. and it could be more complicated to divide further, but there could be some kinds of cases that you might decide further kinds of divides, especially if you have some patterns in your own transactions and then you might be able to combine all of the like transactions that might come out of the same source... for example an exchange.. and maybe even some other third party that you deal with if you believe that you are not really given anything up when you combine them.  the more rigid you try to be, then the more complicated it might become to try to keep track, but if you largely deal in generic categories, then it might be a little easier to main some kind of a system of keeping separate but then sometimes combining them.. especially if you might have a whole bunch of small ones that you cannot really contemplate spending that way.. but another thing could be that you just leave the small ones alone because you already have some of your UTXOs that you know you would be able to use for larger transactions if such a need were to occur.

if in the next cycle I hypothetically wanted to pay for something worth $2,000 I guess there won't be much difference between 1 and 4 inputs as far as fees are concerned either, no? How do you see it?

I wouldn't count in dollars, but in Bitcoins. And I remember the days in 2017 when each (legacy) input added about 1 mBTC to the total fee. No matter what the Bitcoin price is, that's a lot, and 1 or 4 inputs would make a huge difference.

My take: It's a lot like cash money: $5 is convenient to buy a coffee, but it gets annoying already to pay for groceries for the week. Paying with a $10,000 bill would raise questions, and I wouldn't want the barista to know I own those ancient bills. So a bit of everything works for me.
Disclaimer: I've never seen a $10,000 bill. I do own a $10 bill though.

I remember quite a few bitcoiners back in the day (let's say 2014-2016) who used to sometimes consider having 1BTC as too small of an increment, so some of them were separating their coins into 10 BTC increments.. so surely that can become a problem. because even now 0.3 BTC is very close to a $10k bill.

Maybe some of those guys fixed their issues, but I have my doubts because some members do not want to be moving their coins around very much, so surely some of them might be getting into situations in which they would prefer to have some UTXOs with smaller amounts in them.

I have a "friend" who tends to rotate through various addresses, so even an address that has something like 0.3 BTC might end up getting used up over a year or two... that is if the goal might at one time be to exhaust certain UTXOs, but let's say this friend has several BIGGER transactions of $2k to $4k, and then he might have 30 different UTXos that have 0.3 BTC each, so instead of exhausting a couple of the UTXOs, he does the next 10 transactions from each of 10 of those UTXOs and then ends up having around 0.2 BTC in each of those 10 UTXOs that used to have 0.3 BTC... .but then he still has another 20 UTXos that have 0.3 BTC each... does not even sound like a first-world problem, but it does sound like it could be a problem for some bitcoin OGs.

9000 merits even nice.

Yeah if i continue my quasi kyc signature campaign for a while I will combine the coin to one tx.

it is a bc address so it is the cheapest send. But it is 200 usd a week just one more dca. So I will do some shrinkage txs on it.

If it is done for a year it will be 52tx so I will need to manage it well.

My mining income leaves the pool 2 times a month so it is only 6txs  2 from each pool three pools.

I could withdraw daily but that would be 90tx I let the pool push them into 2 a month.

[shield132]

one of the problems is viabtc.com altered the free boost it used to be if you paid at least 11 sats a byte  it would do any size transaction.

now no matter what you pay per byte the limit size trans action is 500 bytes.  these are very small size so there are now always a lot of free accelerations available from them but very few people have a tiny enough tx to use the free one.

Back in 2016 or 2017 I could accelerate any transaction almost anytime, then some months later it got flooded but still I was able to accelerate my transactions if I was fast enough to click on button quickly but then one year later, it was really impossible to accelerate transaction because the 100 limit was immediately reached. Probably, someone or some people were using bots and were immediately accelerating their transactions. Btw ViaBTC had no other option but to use different limiters and requirements in order to get rid of abuse of its free service. I wouldn't return old ViaBTC's accelerator in today's world.

if in the next cycle I hypothetically wanted to pay for something worth $2,000 I guess there won't be much difference between 1 and 4 inputs as far as fees are concerned either, no? How do you see it?

I wouldn't count in dollars, but in Bitcoins. And I remember the days in 2017 when each (legacy) input added about 1 mBTC to the total fee. No matter what the Bitcoin price is, that's a lot, and 1 or 4 inputs would make a huge difference.

My take: It's a lot like cash money: $5 is convenient to buy a coffee, but it gets annoying already to pay for groceries for the week. Paying with a $10,000 bill would raise questions, and I wouldn't want the barista to know I own those ancient bills. So a bit of everything works for me.

Disclaimer: I've never seen a $10,000 bill. I do own a $10 bill though.

Let's say I don't have bitcoins and wanna buy them with my green dollars. I wouldn't be able to count in bitcoins but in dollars if I had to pay my personal $2000 cash.

[Poker Player]

After reading the replies I ended up doing a couple of consolidations yesterday, that got confirmed pretty fast.

[philipma1957]

After reading the replies I ended up doing a couple of consolidations yesterday, that got confirmed pretty fast.

Good as it never hurts to have a few squared away addresses. Sometimes you need to move a larger amount of coin for whatever reason why give sats away.

 I just gave  https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,3m,weight

a small 0.001 donation as he has saved me a lot more than 0.001 btc

bc1q5mtttrekmt2lc92q7059kgy9krah7xa7dfrdvj

[LoyceV]

Bump!



In the last 6 months, mempool has been mostly full. In the past 2 weeks, mempool cleared as far as confirming transactions with less than 2 sat/vbyte many times.
At the moment, fees slightly under 2 sat/vbyte are enough for a fast confirmation.

Consolidate your small inputs while you can, low fees won't last forever!
When you are in a rush, it saves a lot in fees if you can use only one input address (and ideally use native SegWit: bc1q......).

[Timelord2067]

They're still not low enough to shift this transaction (even using third party broadcast/accelerator sites) after I inadvertently set the fee to 0.00000001 no 0.0000001 - Any help would be appreciated given "Trust" wallets and "Core" wallets don't include unconfirmed TX in new transactions.

[Synchronice]

They're still not low enough to shift this transaction (even using third party broadcast/accelerator sites) after I inadvertently set the fee to 0.00000001 no 0.0000001 - Any help would be appreciated given "Trust" wallets and "Core" wallets don't include unconfirmed TX in new transactions.

Well, it costs 0.005 BTC to accelerate that transaction via Binance and F2Pool, ViaBTC even asked for 0.0077 BTC. By the way, you have enabled RBF, so, what's the problem? Isn't it possible for you to either use RBF or Child Pays For Parent?
I think there is no other hope unless someone pays out of her pocket or someone has an access to some mining pools to manually include your transaction.

[Charles-Tim]

They're still not low enough to shift this transaction (even using third party broadcast/accelerator sites) after I inadvertently set the fee to 0.00000001 no 0.0000001 - Any help would be appreciated given "Trust" wallets and "Core" wallets don't include unconfirmed TX in new transactions.

1 sat/vbyte transactions are very many and not likely the mempool is going to be congested up to that. If 2 sat/vbyte is used, the transaction likely would have been confirmed. The transaction support RBF which can be used to pump the fee.

You would also have been able to respond respend the coin because it is more than 2 weeks if you are not using any site to rebroadcast it.

Well, it costs 0.005 BTC to accelerate that transaction via Binance and F2Pool, ViaBTC even asked for 0.0077 BTC. By the way, you have enabled RBF, so, what's the problem? Isn't it possible for you to either use RBF or Child Pays For Parent?
I think there is no other hope unless someone pays out of her pocket or someone has an access to some mining pools to manually include your transaction.

Paid accelerators are very expensive, but definitely he can use RBF.

[LoyceV]

They're still not low enough to shift this transaction

With 1 sat/vbyte, it's part of a very large pool. That's why I prefer to use 1.1 sat/vbyte instead, so at least you're above the large majority on the bottom.
Chances are the transaction would have been dropped if you wouldn't have broadcasted it again.

(even using third party broadcast/accelerator sites)

Broadcasting isn't the same as accelerating. The only working free accelerator I know is ViaBTC, but it requires a higher fee and smaller transaction.

Any help would be appreciated given "Trust" wallets and "Core" wallets don't include unconfirmed TX in new transactions.

Are those your receiving wallets? I don't use Trust wallet, but in Bitcoin Core, I used this once:

I did CPFP with a much higher fee (which took me a while as I had to export/import the privkey first)

After exporting the private key from Bitcoin Core, I used Coin Control in Electrum to send the unconfirmed input.

[Charles-Tim]

It is worth knowing that Trustwallet is a close source wallet and not worth using when there are numerous reputed bitcoin open source wallets.

Any help would be appreciated given "Trust" wallets and "Core" wallets don't include unconfirmed TX in new transactions.

Are those your receiving wallets? I don't use Trust wallet, but in Bitcoin Core, I used this once:

I did CPFP with a much higher fee (which took me a while as I had to export/import the privkey first)

After exporting the private key from Bitcoin Core, I used Coin Control in Electrum to send the unconfirmed input.

You can spend unconfirmed transaction on Electrum also if you import BIP39 wallet seed phrase. Trustwallet is BIP39 and importing its seed phrase on Electrum will make that possible.

[Timelord2067]

Not really sure it's worth installing yet another app on my phone just to up the fee paid. I might see iff I can zappwallet (is that still a thing?)

By the way, you have enabled RBF, so, what's the problem?

The app may have (enabled), not me. As I said earlier, I inadvertently entered 0.00000001 not 0.0000001 so I've just been sitting that one out.

It is worth knowing that Trustwallet is a close source wallet and not worth using

Looks like the only one being suggested is Electrum, for small amounts I find Trust Wallet okay.

1 sat/vbyte transactions are very many and not likely the mempool is going to be congested up to that.

Not sure why but one of the explorers keeps saying it's at the end of the queue and never progresses toward the start of the pile.

[Charles-Tim]

Not really sure it's worth installing yet another app on my phone just to up the fee paid. I might see iff I can zappwallet (is that still a thing?)

I do not know much about Zapp wallet, but this are lists of opens source wallet that support RBF: Bitcoin open source wallets that support replace-by-fee (RBF). Follow LoyceV advice, or use 2 sat/vbyte which I do not think is too much.

To import seed phrase or private key on a wallet is not difficult, but left to you. Like we have posted before, Electrum is recommended.

The app may have (enabled), not me. As I said earlier, I inadvertently entered 0.00000001 not 0.0000001 so I've just been sitting that one out.

The lowest fee for 1 sat/vbyte is when you use segwit address which is 110 vbyte for 1 input and 1 output, which makes the fee paid to be 110 sat (0.0000011 BTC). Your transaction consists of 4 inputs which are legacy addresses, and 3 outputs which are 1 native segwit, 1 nested segwit and 1 change address which makes your transaction to be 695 byte in size and 695 sat (0.00000695 BTC) in fee.

Looks like the only one being suggested is Electrum, for small amounts I find Trust Wallet okay.

For small amount, online Electrum or other reputed online wallets like Sparrow et cetera are recommended. For high amount, cold wallet storage is recommended, like paper wallet if created appropriately offline, reputed hardware wallet or wallet like Electrum on airgapped device.

Trustwallet is not recommended at all. It only have one bitcoin address, not having means to pump fee using RBF or CPFP. Many Trustwallet users do complain about error, especially when mempool is congested.

[LoyceV]

Not really sure it's worth installing yet another app on my phone just to up the fee paid.

After 2 months, I'd do it just to get over it. Or use Electrum from a Linux Live DVD. You may even be able to use CPFP with coinb.in (risks involved!).

I might see iff I can zappwallet (is that still a thing?)

Did you create the transaction from Bitcoin Core? If so: right mouse > is "Abandon transaction" available?

I inadvertently entered 0.00000001 not 0.0000001 so I've just been sitting that one out.

Counting that many zeros is one of the reasons I set all my wallets to mBTC instead of BTC. It helps

Not sure why but one of the explorers keeps saying it's at the end of the queue and never progresses toward the start of the pile.

Each miner will have their own order in mempool.

For small amount, online Electrum or other reputed online wallets like Sparrow et cetera are recommended.

For small amounts (AKA the amounts you can easily afford to lose), it doesn't matter much.

Trustwallet is not recommended at all. It only have one bitcoin address

Does that make Trustwallet the sender?

[Timelord2067]

Not really sure it's worth installing yet another app on my phone just to up the fee paid. I might see iff I can zappwallet (is that still a thing?)

I do not know much about Zapp wallet, but this are lists of opens source wallet that support RBF: Bitcoin open source wallets that support replace-by-fee (RBF).

Not the "Zap Wallet" program/app - (I'm not even sure what the command was now, it's been that long since I've had to do it) zapwallet / zaptransaction - something like that.  I tried abandontransaction quite a long time ago and that also didn't work.  I was only moving a small amount to the Trust wallet to cover if I have to refund/pay out the wager I have with aoluain in the Rugby discussion thread which I've been holding in my bc1qj9nm97yx377z688cj7h0yl45wve28he05hgrah wallet address for the last two months (it's the semi finals this weekend and the grand-final the weekend after hence the need now to move the funds to cover the transaction).

Bitcoin open source wallets that support replace-by-fee (RBF)

Not having a stuck transaction for quite a long time I was blissfully unaware ^"*"of the RBF command in the CORE wallet - I typed in bumpfee (TX) and it added 5sats/vb and the transaction was confirmed in under a minute - fortunately I had some funds in that wallet or I'd still be scratching my head. (Normally I would just use the links in the Broadcast Your RAW Transaction thread, but they haven't budged it either)

"*" and as the pharmacist would say "why would I? I don't need to use it!"

[F2b]

Sorry if it's a bit off-topic, but like many of us I've been looking at mempool.space quite a lot recently. And I don't really get the second graph, "Transaction vBytes per second (vB/s)":



I guess it has to do with the amount of transactions received by mempool.space's nodes, but why was it so high? Is it just that nodes were rebroadcasting purged transactions? It doesn't seem very reasonable to me, but I can't find another reason. Any insights?

[LoyceV]

I guess it has to do with the amount of transactions received by mempool.space's nodes, but why was it so high? Is it just that nodes were rebroadcasting purged transactions?

That sounds plausible. Fees were going up, transactions were dropping, and I assume every RBF counts as a new transaction. But still, that would mean each transaction got several fee bumps.

[LoyceV]

After several days of fees around 20+ sat/vbyte, at the moment 2.1 sat/vbyte is likely to get you a quick confirmation. I guess it was Bitcoin's quick price increase that lead to an increase in transaction numbers.

[apogio]

After several days of fees around 20+ sat/vbyte, at the moment 2.1 sat/vbyte is likely to get you a quick confirmation. I guess it was Bitcoin's quick price increase that lead to an increase in transaction numbers.

Are you sure about these fees? I wanted to consolidate some UTXOs but my node estimates a quick confirmation for 15+ sat/vb

[LoyceV]

Are you sure about these fees? I wanted to consolidate some UTXOs but my node estimates a quick confirmation for 15+ sat/vb

Bitcoin Core's estimate is much higher than needed for the purpose of this topic. Look at this graph, hover your mouse on the right, and see what fees were not high enough to be included in the past few hours.