error: {u'message': u'TX rejected', u'code': -22} is back HELP

[opentoe]

I'm receiving this error when trying to send a small amount. I made sure the .0005 fee in already included and Electrum won't let you input more anyway if you don't have it. I'm just trying to to zero balance my wallet and I'm trying to send .17984967 and the capture screen shot is what happens after I enter my password. By the way, I have over 20 confirmations on those coins. I tried multiple servers also. Now that I'm using Electrum more and more I'm seeing the negative issues. I came from Armory, which was hell because I couldn't access my coins and now the same exact thing is happening with Electrum. Is there a reliable bitcoin client out there that just works?

[btcven]

Electrum just works, if you don't try to spend recently mined coins  

You came from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=307079.0 did you read the entire thread?

[opentoe]

Electrum just works, if you don't try to spend recently mined coins  

You came from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=307079.0 did you read the entire thread?

Yea, that's a bug. My coins had over 20 confirmations and I needed to send then. Electrum couldn't because according to Electrum they are newly minded coins. To me, that is a bug. I already switched to another client. Pretty soon there won't be any left to switch to.

[btcven]

Good luck then.

So, the problem was with newly mined coins

[opentoe]

Good luck then.

So, the problem was with newly mined coins

I would say the problem is with the client and not with the newly mined coins. The two other clients I have used don't have this problem.

[Moshi]

Good luck then.

So, the problem was with newly mined coins

I would say the problem is with the client and not with the newly mined coins. The two other clients I have used don't have this problem.

I'd agree here. I was having the same error a few weeks back after my wallet was dormant for several months - at first I thought it was an issue with fees, but some google'ing denied that and redoubled frustration. It took an hour and an Ubuntu installation to get anything working again. I'm not sure I'll be sticking with Electrum after that fiasco - it ruined a trade, but I guess that's partly my fault.

[atweiden]

I've encountered this problem numerous times with old coins, but I've always been able to send regardless. I'm thinking this section is in need of an FAQ.

I suspect the issue may have to do with each Bitcoin wallet containing a unique set of unspent outputs. We could conceivably work around this on the client by forcing Electrum users to select higher than average fees or forcing prioritization of larger unspent outputs, but the way it works currently, users have more control over how coins are spent.

In any case, if your wallet ever throws this error, consider taking the following two steps:

1. In the Receive tab (expert mode on), right-click on an address with a larger number of coins in it, and click "Prioritize". Resend.

I'd estimate just doing step #1 has worked for me over 75% of the time.

2. If step #1 fails, *increase the fee*. Resend.

You should be okay. I don't think this is overly costly in terms of time or money, but we could conceivably handle the error in the GUI more gracefully, so that users aren't left with an indecipherable error code without any hint as to how they may work around it. A link to an FAQ at the least may help. I've been meaning to come up with one myself. Lots more documentation is needed. A significant amount of work has gone into the upcoming major release, and the Electrum community has really been innovating as of late on all aspects of the client.

Again, I suspect this "type -22" issue is encountered because each Electrum wallet history is unique. If you run Linux or Mac, on the command line you can check your wallet's unspent output tree for yourself by running `electrum listunspent`. You may find that your wallet has a higher number of low-value unspent transactions. You should be able to work around this in the GUI by either increasing the fee or prioritizing an address with a larger unspent transaction 'attached to it'.

I profusely apologize if this error cost you a trade. It should be an avoidable, uncommon annoyance now that you know how to work around it.

[Moshi]

I've encountered this problem numerous times with old coins, but I've always been able to send regardless. I'm thinking this section is in need of an FAQ.

I suspect the issue may have to do with each Bitcoin wallet containing a unique set of unspent outputs. We could conceivably work around this on the client by forcing Electrum users to select higher than average fees or forcing prioritization of larger unspent outputs, but the way it works currently, users have more control over how coins are spent.

In any case, if your wallet gets stuck, consider taking the following two steps:

1. In the Receive tab (expert mode on), right-click on an address with more coins in it than you're trying to send, and click "Prioritize". Resend. This isn't especially fullproof if you've been reusing the same address to receive micropayments, but you probably haven't been doing that.

I'd estimate just doing step #1 has worked for me over 75% of the time.

2. If step #1 fails, *increase the fee*. Resend.

You should be okay. I don't think this is overly costly in terms of time or money, but we could conceivably handle the error in the GUI more gracefully, so that users aren't left with an indecipherable error code without any hint as to how they may work around it. A link to an FAQ at the least may help. I've been meaning to come up with one myself. Lots more documentation is needed. A significant amount of work has gone into the upcoming major release, and the Electrum community has really been innovating as of late on all aspects of the client.

Again, I suspect this "type -22" issue is encountered because each Electrum wallet history is unique. If you run Linux or Mac, on the command line you can check your wallet's unspent output tree for yourself by running `electrum listunspent`. You may find that your wallet has a higher number of low-value unspent transactions. You should be able to work around this in the GUI by either increasing the fee or prioritizing an address with a larger unspent transaction 'attached to it'.

I profusely apologize if this error cost you a trade. It should be an avoidable uncommon annoyance kind of thing now that you know how to work around it.

If I understood this correctly, is there any particular reason Electrum consistently forces the use of smaller outputs? And conversely, why doesn't the client notify the user of an insufficient transaction fee? (instead of resorting to an obscure error code)

[btcven]

If I understood this correctly, is there any particular reason Electrum consistently forces the use of smaller outputs? And conversely, why doesn't the client notify the user of an insufficient transaction fee? (instead of resorting to an obscure error code)

The obscure error code comes from bitcoind refusing the transaction, not the Electrum client

[Moshi]

If I understood this correctly, is there any particular reason Electrum consistently forces the use of smaller outputs? And conversely, why doesn't the client notify the user of an insufficient transaction fee? (instead of resorting to an obscure error code)

The obscure error code comes from bitcoind refusing the transaction, not the Electrum client

Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.

[btcven]

If I understood this correctly, is there any particular reason Electrum consistently forces the use of smaller outputs? And conversely, why doesn't the client notify the user of an insufficient transaction fee? (instead of resorting to an obscure error code)

The obscure error code comes from bitcoind refusing the transaction, not the Electrum client

Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not sure, maybe I said bitcoind, but it is the network which refuses it and the server (bitcoind) responds with that to the client. More expert Electrum devs can clear it out.

[EagleTM]

1.9.3 should be a lot better with less tx rejected errors. 1.9.x notifies you if the coins haven't matured and we were able to fix two bugs which prevented tx to be sent (dust change, signing after a tx was rejected)

[opentoe]

So this bug has been fixed in the latest 1.9.5 release? I don't want to start dumping my coins into Electrum wallet until a few issues get resolved. I'm waiting to hear back from another thread about my receiving addresses all being changed after the upgrade.

Thanks

[Abdussamad]

So this bug has been fixed in the latest 1.9.5 release? I don't want to start dumping my coins into Electrum wallet until a few issues get resolved. I'm waiting to hear back from another thread about my receiving addresses all being changed after the upgrade.

Thanks

You can't spend newly mined coins until you get at least 120 confirmations. Doesn't matter which client you use you will see this restriction.

[btcven]

So this bug has been fixed in the latest 1.9.5 release? I don't want to start dumping my coins into Electrum wallet until a few issues get resolved. I'm waiting to hear back from another thread about my receiving addresses all being changed after the upgrade.

Thanks

You can't spend newly mined coins until you get at least 120 confirmations. Doesn't matter which client you use you will see this restriction.

But with other clients he needs to wait for the client to sync, so the confirmations have plenty of time to hit 120 xD

[eirero]

I'm getting the same error code with 1.9.6 Portable, trying to send 0.05BTC of Bitcoins with 133 confirmations. How can that be?

[clowncoin]

I am getting the same error in 1.98 on OSX. I did not mine my coins. What is going on?

[clowncoin]

I am getting the same error in 1.98 on OSX. I did not mine my coins. What is going on?

Fixed by manually connecting to a different server.