0/unconfirmed status for about 12 hours

[digimag]

Hello,

I am new to Bitcoin; I tried to make a transaction from Bitcoin faucet.

After about two hours, the transaction appeared with a 0/unconfirmed status.

This morning (about two hours ago) I started my computer and the transaction still had this unconfirmed status.

Here is the address I used for this transaction:

1HmxsQBuWZMUGaZSA65KQZBRkh6FvXvmjA

In the status bar I can see: 8 connections / 111196 blocks / 1 transactions.

What could be wrong?

Thanks!

[1714023301]

1714023301

[1714023301]

1714023301

[1714023301]

1714023301

[1714023301]

1714023301

[digimag]

If it can help, I'm using the 3.20.1-beta version for Mac OS X.

[SmokeTooMuch]

Hm, not sure why that is happening.
maybe it helps starting bitcoin with the -rescan switch

[caveden]

According to the block explorer your address has never been used.

It's weird, if you see the 0/unconfirmed transaction it means the transaction was signed by the faucet and you received it on your client... why hasn't it been added to any block, I don't know... I mean, it seems the network forgot about it. I thought that in such situations your client (or that of the faucet) would rebroadcast it.

Unless there's something quite unusual with your transaction that is making every miner to refuse it. But why would the faucet produce a non-standard transaction and how come your client recognized it?

[caveden]

maybe it helps starting bitcoin with the -rescan switch

Won't help, it seems the transaction hasn't yet been added to the block chain.

[digimag]

Well, but how did I receive it then?

I'm posting some screenshots here.





http://freebitcoins.appspot.com/ told me this morning it already gave me 0.05 coins but now it allows me to send bitcoins again. So I just did it again. This time, it appeared within seconds:

[digimag]

Some news:

I've just created another address and sent a payement through my server (using SOCKS proxy, so I can have a different IP).

It seems to work this time:



So the problem is with my first address? What's wrong with it?

[caveden]

This is weird, I fail to understand what is the issue.

Does anyone else know if there's a way to dump the transaction pool?

The only thing that makes sense to me is that the transactions which have your address as output are not standard, but if it's the case, then it's probably a bug in the software, since I believe the faucet uses bitcoind to send its transactions.

It would be nice if somebody with a better knowledge of the source could take a look at this. Bump this thread tomorrow if you don't get any answer. The forums have been so busy lately, people might not notice your thread.

[Mahkul]

This is a little bit worrying, since several people reported this...

[caveden]

Really? It's the first one I see.
Do you know if there's a way to dump the transaction pool, so people could see if there's anything particular with his transaction?

[BitLex]

not the first one i see.
just noticed one transaction today that also needed ~3hours to get its first confirmation, while other transactions done at the same time got confirmed as usual within a few minutes.
some other people been waiting 12hours and more, to get 1conf.

so i doubt it's something with his transaction.

[Raulo]

Today, I've sent a test 1 BTC transaction with about 4KB size (which will be low priority) and it's not included in any block after a few hours so it's not an isolated case.

A vary bad feature of the client is that it is not giving a warning about a very low priority payment. And of course there is no standard way to resend a transaction with a fee included if it is not confirmed after xx blocks.

[theymos]

Today, I've sent a test 1 BTC transaction with about 4KB size (which will be low priority) and it's not included in any block after a few hours so it's not an isolated case.

A vary bad feature of the client is that it is not giving a warning about a very low priority payment. And of course there is no standard way to resend a transaction with a fee included if it is not confirmed after xx blocks.

This seems to be the cause of all the recent problems. The transactions will confirm eventually, but it will take at least several days.

[caveden]

The maximum block size is 10KB isn't it? So this isn't a problem of priority. There's enough space to include all of them. Plus, I've just checked a few of the last blocks, and them all contained free transactions, what means that miners are not deliberately refusing free transactions either.

There must be something particular to these transactions that don't get added...

[theymos]

The maximum block size is 10KB isn't it? So this isn't a problem of priority. There's enough space to include all of them. Plus, I've just checked a few of the last blocks, and them all contained free transactions, what means that miners are not deliberately refusing free transactions either.

There must be something particular to these transactions that don't get added...

The maximum block size is 500 kB (1MB receiving), but if the block size is over 4kB, low-priority free transactions will not be accepted. It's possible to create a transaction over 4kB that always triggers this and never gets in a block until its priority rises with age.

[caveden]

The maximum block size is 500 kB (1MB receiving), but if the block size is over 4kB, low-priority free transactions will not be accepted. It's possible to create a transaction over 4kB that always triggers this and never gets in a block until its priority rises with age.

Okay, the default client transaction policy. So, most custom miners are just following it... I thought people would create their own policies...

Anyway, so there's nothing digimag can do but wait.

[digimag]

Anyway, so there's nothing digimag can do but wait.

Well, bank transfers can take up to 10 days with PayPal, so a few days may not be so bad I guess…

[caveden]

Besides, the faucet gives you free money... you can't complain about the delay.

But this is interesting anyway. A few free transactions are starting to have a hard time getting included in the block chain... if this fee policy keeps being used by most miners, maybe it won't take much longer for it to become difficult to send any free transaction. People in a hurry will have to start adding fees.

[digimag]

Payement received

It took 24 hours.

It might be bad timing for Bitcoin but it's still quite good compared to real bank transfers!

[Stephen Gornick]

There are at this time over 2,000 unconfirmed transactions queued, some more than 24 hours old.
 http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin


Is this the end of the road for having a free ewallet provider (e.g., MyBitcoin) due to the end of the "free transactions" era?