Bitcoin transaction

[GreatArkansas]

I have a few questions about the transaction for Bitcoin.

I have this x Hierarchical Deterministic wallet, then that x wallet, after I receive a bitcoin, I am changing/automatically changing my receiving address to another again and will use that new address to receive another bitcoin.

For example.
After those many transactions from multiple receiving addresses, I decided to send all my bitcoin from my x wallet to another wallet.
So, my total input in a transaction are all the addresses that still have unspent bitcoins.

My questions are:
1.) What are the pros/cons of changing my receiving address for every time I receive a bitcoin to my Hierarchical Deterministic wallet?

2.) I also noticed that if you have much input in one transaction, the transaction size gets bigger, then it requires some huge fee to confirm my transaction.(Let's say my example transaction above is executed).
       - How can I prevent or solve this problem (having a huge fee)?

[1713561265]

1713561265

[1713561265]

1713561265

[1713561265]

1713561265

[bitmover]

My questions are:
1.) What are the pros/cons of changing my receiving address for every time I receive a bitcoin to my Hierarchical Deterministic wallet?

There are no cons. The xgood side is that it protects your privacy , as you are giving someone a never used address so no other transaction can be traced to you.

2.) I also noticed that if you have much input in one transaction, the transaction size gets bigger, then it requires some huge fee to confirm my transaction.(Let's say my example transaction above is executed).
       - How can I prevent or solve this problem (having a huge fee)?

The number of inputs do not depend on the number of addresses, but number of transactions. You can have 30 inputs in the same address

The solution for this is to consolidate your inputs when fees are low. To do this you just have to do a transaction to your own wallet.
You could do that anytime actually, if you have no hurry. Just set 1/sat per byte and wait .
Guide here by LoyceV

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2848987.0

[joniboini]

Looking at your practice, it seems that in the end a third-party could still know that all of those address belongs to the same person because you consolidate it to one address. They can also know that if you use one single exchange address or something similar. If that's a problem for you, you might want to use coinjoin or use a good mixer before you consolidate or send your Bitcoins from those address. CMIIW.

[RapTarX]

2.) I also noticed that if you have much input in one transaction, the transaction size gets bigger, then it requires some huge fee to confirm my transaction.(Let's say my example transaction above is executed).
       - How can I prevent or solve this problem (having a huge fee)?

Say, you have 0.10 BTC in an address. You received it in 3 steps.
0.03, 0.04, 0.03
Now, if you want to send 0.05 BTC, your input will be 2.
If you want to send 0.03 BTC or lower, your input will be 1.
If you want to send 0.07 BTC, your input will be 3.

Input is which BTC are you sending, not related to address. It would be the same if you had 0.10 BTC divided in 3 address.
So, using multiple address won't give you any cons.

bitmover has linked a thread, when fee is lower, you can combine all the input into a single one. In that way, you can avoid the extra fee for more inputs.

[hd49728]

You could do that anytime actually, if you have no hurry. Just set 1/sat per byte and wait .
Guide here by LoyceV

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2848987.0

Exactly, it is better to consolidate coins inside wallets, but transactions to exchanges can be confirmed with fee set at 1 sat / byte. Weeks ago, my transaction confirmed after three or four days. It's cool.
Besides LoyceV's thread, I suggest to read mine: Bitcoin Transaction Fees - Everything in one
Please remember to check mempool situation, and suggested fees on https://coinb.in/#fees. Today, suggested fee rises to 19 satoshis/ byte, that is not a good day to consolidate your coins.
Additionally, time zone to move your coins should be considered too.

Time zones affect fees
Details below. In general, if you are not hurry, please choose the timezones at which fees usually are low to move your funds.

You can compare the data from this study with the data generated at Johoe's Mempool Statistics page: https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#1,2w. Here's a random 2 week sample I took from last September (click for full size):

The dates along the bottom are at midnight (00:00) UTC. So you can see from this sample, there is a spike in fees on most days between around 10:00 and 18:00 (when Europe and then later America are awake), at which point they start reducing, and hit a low point around 01:00 - 04:00 UTC. This certainly ties in with the data from OP's study.

It's something I've casually noticed, but never given much though to. But considering it now, I wouldn't have expected such a constant and similar drop given that China has more people than Europe and North America combined.

[GreatArkansas]

There are no cons.

How about when I am having a lot of addresses with unspent small btc amount there, and I will just make one transaction, then expect that the number of inputs will increase, just like what @RapTarX said below.
- So, the transaction size in bytes will increase too right? Then it still okay to use a low satoshi/byte fee even the txn size is big?
This is not a con for that case?

Thanks, I just read the thread of LoyceV, it's much clearer to me now.

They can also know that if you use one single exchange address or something similar. If that's a problem for you, you might want to use coinjoin or use a good mixer before you consolidate or send your Bitcoins from those address. CMIIW.

Thanks for that, but I'm a little bit concern or curious how the fees calculated on every transaction.

~snip
bitmover has linked a thread, when fee is lower, you can combine all the input into a single one. In that way, you can avoid the extra fee for more inputs.

Thanks for the very detailed explanation, I really appreciated it, easy to understand.

But when I did this, does the still the same if I will combine all input into single one address of the same wallet? than sending those input to another wallet address?

Weeks ago, my transaction confirmed after three or four days. It's cool.

What is the total size in bytes of your transaction before and how many sat/byte you set for the fee?

[hd49728]

What is the total size in bytes of your transaction before and how many sat/byte you set for the fee?

I don't remember, but I move my coins with one input, and one output, fee set at 1 sat/ byte. If you are not hurry, and can wait for days, or one/ two weeks, you can spare lots of fees.

[nakamura12]

I haven't heard someone having cons with changing receiving wallet address to have your own privacy as it is. I also know that there are other people out there change their receiving wallet address and I also did it sometimes. As what I understand you have to set 1sat/byte to have lower fees but you have to be patient as the confirmation may take longer than expected.

[RapTarX]

This is not a con for that case?

Yes, no cons.
Say, you are using single address, you have received 3 transactions on that address. Your input will be 3.
Now, say, you used 3 different addresses for receiving that 3 transactions. Still the input is 3.
Therefore, both are same. Using different address is giving you extra security.

They can also know that if you use one single exchange
Thanks for that, but I'm a little bit concern or curious how the fees calculated on every transaction.

Not very detailed but I think it will be informative for you- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5139978.msg50923572#msg50923572

But when I did this, does the still the same if I will combine all input into single one address of the same wallet? than sending those input to another wallet address?

Same, discussed in 1st quote.

[nc50lc]

For example.
After those many transactions from multiple receiving addresses, I decided to send all my bitcoin from my x wallet to another wallet.
So, my total input in a transaction are all the addresses that still have unspent bitcoins.

A small correction to your example scenario: It will be based on the number of unspent outputs (UTXO) from your "inbound transactions" not from the number of addresses alone (as they said: there's no addresses in the protocol level).
If you've used an address to receive BTC multiple times, it will have multiple UTXO and that address will display multiple times in the "send-all transaction" as inputs.

My questions are:
1.) What are the pros/cons of changing my receiving address for every time I receive a bitcoin to my Hierarchical Deterministic wallet?
2.) I also noticed that if you have much input in one transaction, the transaction size gets bigger, then it requires some huge fee to confirm my transaction.(Let's say my example transaction above is executed).

-already answered-

[pooya87]

1.) What are the pros/cons of changing my receiving address for every time I receive a bitcoin to my Hierarchical Deterministic wallet?

the best thing you would be doing is avoiding address reuse. and this can protect you against some bugs in some of these HD wallets without you even knowing it. for example the case of blockchain.info reusing k values.
when creating a EC signature you select a random value called k, if you reuse this k your private key can be recovered easily. in this case when you have more than one input in one address and want to spend them you are signing once per input. if your wallet is broken and is giving you the same k, you reveal your private key instantly. but if you have more than one key and only use them once, even if you are reusing the same k it is impossible to recover private key since each key is only used once. https://crypto.stackexchange.com/a/46622/67204

[bitmover]

- So, the transaction size in bytes will increase too right? Then it still okay to use a low satoshi/byte fee even the txn size is big?
This is not a con for that case?

The is calculated based in your Satoshi/byte. This is all you can control.
The number of inputs will increase the size (bytes of your transaction). You can consolidating your inputs with 1 Satoshi/byte , and it will confirm in a few hours if fees are low. Fees are high now... But I managed to do some consolidation with 3 sat/byte few days ago.

But when I did this, does the still the same if I will combine all input into single one address of the same wallet? than sending those input to another wallet address?

As I said ,  I doesn't matter if you have one address or not. One address may have hundreds of inputs. You can consolidate in the same wallet or another one if you like, it doesn't make any difference

[GreatArkansas]

~snip

~snip
As I said ,  I doesn't matter if you have one address or not. One address may have hundreds of inputs. You can consolidate in the same wallet or another one if you like, it doesn't make any difference

I figured it now, thanks to everyone for clarifying my questions. I tried some transaction with lower satoshi/byte and multiple inputs and find out some answered.
It's clearer now especially last few days, the fees dropped and I can transaction some below 5 satoshis/bytes, it even dropped around 1 satoshi/byte and tried to consolidate some of my bitcoins.

Thanks everyone, once again.

[bitmover]

I made a consolidation yesterday with 1 Satoshi per byte.
It was nice, it took like 10 hours. Waiting even 5 days is not a problem to me, as I am transferring to myself

[Thirdspace]

~snip
As I said ,  I doesn't matter if you have one address or not. One address may have hundreds of inputs. You can consolidate in the same wallet or another one if you like, it doesn't make any difference

I figured it now, thanks to everyone for clarifying my questions. I tried some transaction with lower satoshi/byte and multiple inputs and find out some answered.
It's clearer now especially last few days, the fees dropped and I can transaction some below 5 satoshis/bytes, it even dropped around 1 satoshi/byte and tried to consolidate some of my bitcoins.

now as you have understood that transaction inputs are utxo based,
you need to keep in mind about your privacy in consolidating your bitcoin
you are losing your privacy when using multiple utxos from different addresses in a single transaction,
to avoid this you may want to consolidate it one address at a time, use a coinjoin service, or even a mixer

[GreatArkansas]

now as you have understood that transaction inputs are utxo based,
you need to keep in mind about your privacy in consolidating your bitcoin
you are losing your privacy when using multiple utxos from different addresses in a single transaction,
to avoid this you may want to consolidate it one address at a time, use a coinjoin service, or even a mixer

Thanks for reminding that and I am aware of that.
What I just am curious about is more on transaction fees, but with the help of everyone I much now understood it.

I'll look and try to research about coinjoin services since I read some cases about that here on the forum especially when the seizure of one of the biggest bitcoin mixer a few months ago.