I know this has been brought up before, but confirmation times are getting weird

[chriswilmer]

Something changed recently and I don't know what, but it has me slightly worried. The average confirmation times have shot up quite drastically.

This was brought up a few days ago... but it wasn't clear at that point whether it was a statistical anomaly or something real. Now it seems more likely to be real.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-confirmation-time?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

Anybody know what's going on?

[1714120681]

1714120681

[1714120681]

1714120681

[1714120681]

1714120681

[1714120681]

1714120681

[1714120681]

1714120681

[jl2012]

Something changed recently and I don't know what, but it has me slightly worried. The average confirmation times have shot up quite drastically.

This was brought up a few days ago... but it wasn't clear at that point whether it was a statistical anomaly or something real. Now it seems more likely to be real.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-confirmation-time?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

Anybody know what's going on?

Difficulty increased and some miners dropped

[chriswilmer]

Something changed recently and I don't know what, but it has me slightly worried. The average confirmation times have shot up quite drastically.

This was brought up a few days ago... but it wasn't clear at that point whether it was a statistical anomaly or something real. Now it seems more likely to be real.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-confirmation-time?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

Anybody know what's going on?

Difficulty increased and some miners dropped

I doubt that's the reason... the difficulty has been increasing enormously for all of 2013 and the confirmation time was only getting faster (not slower) during that period.

[oakpacific]

If you check the all-time graph, it used to reach 15-20 minutes.

[jago25_98]

I wouldn't expect this to be a factor... but what if it was. What if the great wall of china was an influence?

[DeathAndTaxes]

Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

[allbiznessman]

Another thing which I noticed today, which may or may not be related, is that while making a few satoshidice bets, one bet would show 22:40 and then my bet would come in and showed 21:41, and another right after it showed 23:42. It was quite odd I thought and also it caused one or 2 of my bets to take forever to be returned. While other peoples bets were being returned after one confirmation, my bet which was an hour or 2 before (only according to the time shown) had to wait for about 6 to 8 confirmations before it paid out. This was sent through my blockchain wallet. I do have the privkeys in bitcoind also but I am tethered to my laptop so it'll take forever to download and slow me down browsing, since I haven't been caught up with the blockchain in quite a while.

[jl2012]

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem

[DeathAndTaxes]

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem

Well the UXTO currently contains paying tx waiting longer than a block although I have been paying the min fee on every tx (even those which don't require it) for two years now so you are preaching to the choir.

[adamstgBit]

Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

am i missing somthing?

[allbiznessman]

Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

Yes it is up to the miners. Anyone can set bitcoind to only accept transactions with 0.0005 BTC transaction fees if they wanted, and if their hash rate is high enough to solve a block reward than that is what will go. Like the add on which was debated quite a while back, to avoid all satoshidice addresses. It is up to the miners. If you have the hash rate, you have the control of who goes and who waits.

[DeathAndTaxes]

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

[chriswilmer]

Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

@D&T: I read your first post about this. What I don't understand is... what changed? Why is this happening now?

[adamstgBit]

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

[chriswilmer]

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

Right. This is the question. Also, it's mysterious that this started happening just a few days ago.

[westkybitcoins]

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

Probably because far too many of those transactions are being sent with low (or no) transaction fees, and the miners just don't feel like turning charity into an entitlement.

I'd like to know the stats as far as the trends in fees go. But if that is the case, I can't say I blame the miners for not wanting to encourage the practice.

[jl2012]

what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

A large block would increase the odds of being orphaned, so they don't really have incentive to include zero-fee or low-fee transactions.

[Rupture]

I'm slightly annoyed cause sometimes it's fast and sometimes slow

[MoonShadow]

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem

That's it, right here.  The block only permits a limited amount of zero fee transactions to be included, and any additional transactions must meet the criteria for the fee schedule to be included into a block.  Basicly, too many people are choosing cost of transaction over time to confirmation.  This is to be expected as the number of transactions increase, as this sets up a market for the fees (higher fees are more likely to be favored into the next block) while still providing for a free (or out of band transaction fee) methodology.

[oakpacific]

Anyone knows if Eligius is still doing zero-fee transactions?