Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

[Chandu141]

I keep getting this Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool,

 

wallet fully synced and working well. also added sufficient fee

even after many new blocks syncing , Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

[1715376875]

1715376875

[1715376875]

1715376875

[1715376875]

1715376875

[1715376875]

1715376875

[1715376875]

1715376875

[AB de Royse777]

What fees you have in sat/b?
Right now fees are really low, I was amazed to see even with 5 sat/B you can get the next block.



Your question is not clear to me. Do you mind sharing the tx here?

[Upgrade00]

Is this a recent transaction you made or an old unconfirmed one?

There's probably a glitch for the transaction to not be on the mempool; it's possible the parent transaction was unconfirmed at the time of sending and later got cancelled (through a double spend or got dropped from all mempools) rendering all child transactions invalid.
If you're the one sending the bitcoins, you should also verify the receiving address to ensure it is a Bitcoin address.
You can also try tracking the transaction on multiple block explorers.

All these are guesses and we'll probably need more information, like txid or public address to give a more accurate advise.

[hosseinimr93]

You are using bitcoin core. Right?

Your transaction hasn't been broadcast and that's likely because your wallet is not synced. If that's the case, you need to wait for your wallet to be synced.
You can also export your private key(s) and make the transaction using other wallets like Electrum.
The other option is to export the raw transaction and broadcast it using some tools like coinb.in.

[NeuroticFish]

OP, is this a transaction you've sent or it's one you were expecting?
Because if it's one you've expecting then maybe the sender has replaced it with a transaction towards another address and you'll receive nothing. (you'll have to read about RBF, double spend, wait for at least one confirmation when trading).

PS. I've got in the last 12h a transaction confirmed with 2 sat/vbyte, so the fees are indeed low again

[nc50lc]

even after many new blocks syncing , Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

Means that the transaction isn't even in your own mempool.

You can use the console command sendrawtransaction to broadcast it ('Window->Console' to open console).
Just get that particular txn's "RAW transaction" using the right click menu and paste that after the command.
eg:

Code:

sendrawtransaction "raw_transaction_in_hex"

Do you happen to have an entry like walletbroadcast=0 on your bitcoin.conf?
If so, remove it or set it to "1".

[Chandu141]

Thanks for the quick responses ,

i have been abandoning my tx after waiting for couple of blocks to try again and again.. there were no confirmations. always shows the Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

[bob123]

there were no confirmations

What fee did you use?
If you used 1 sat/vB, it makes sense that your TX wasn't included within a few blocks after broadcasting it.

However, did you try what others suggested to 1) check whether the transaction has been broadcasted or 2) to broadcast it using the CLI / some online tool ?
Did you encounter any problem while trying to do so?

[khaled0111]

What fee did you use?
If you used 1 sat/vB, it makes sense that your TX wasn't included within a few blocks after broadcasting it.

He mentioned in OP that he "added sufficient fee", so I don't think it was 1sat/b.
Since the transaction isn't in the mempool then most likely your wallet isn't fully synced or the transaction wasn't broadcasted at all.
@OP, how did you manage to abandon the transaction? (If this is even possible without double spending!).

If you are in a hurry then just import your addresese's private key into another wallet as hosseinimr93 suggested, till someone figures out what the problem is.

[bob123]

He mentioned in OP that he "added sufficient fee", so I don't think it was 1sat/b.

OP doesn't seem to be the most technically versed person here. A "sufficient fee" is relative. Asking doesn't hurt IMO.

Since the transaction isn't in the mempool then most likely your wallet isn't fully synced or the transaction wasn't broadcasted at all.
@OP, how did you manage to abandon the transaction? (If this is even possible without double spending!).

If it indeed is not in the mempool, it can simply be abandoned by deleting it from the local mempool/wallet.

Further, i believe the fastest way to get the transaction broadcasted is to enter the broadcast command in the CLI or to push the raw transaction himself.

[PrimeNumber7]

i have been abandoning my tx after waiting for couple of blocks to try again and again..

You should be more patient than waiting 'a couple of blocks'.

Can you describe the inputs you are using to fund the transaction? Are all the inputs confirmed?

[HCP]

i have been abandoning my tx after waiting for couple of blocks to try again and again.. there were no confirmations. always shows the Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

"Abandoning" a transaction does not cancel it... If it was broadcast, then it's like other nodes still have a record of it. Also, if a transaction was "abandoned", it will still show in your transaction list as it is stored locally within your wallet file.

If you no longer want to see a record of this transaction, you should shut down Bitcoin Core, then start it with -zapwallettxes command line argument... This will remove all trace of the transaction from your wallet, and you'll be able to simply start again and create a new transaction.


As mentioned, one potential issue is that the transaction was indeed broadcast at some point, and other nodes still have a record of it... this means it could still get confirmed at some point in the future (assuming none of the UTXOs are spent in the meantime). However, if you've searched for your transactionID on a blockexplorer (like blockstream.info, blockcypher.com, blockchain.com, blockchair.com, url=https://btc.com/]btc.com[/url] etc) and you've found nothing, then you should be OK.

[OutCast3k]

For double spending and RBF see this:

https://blog.coinb.in/guide_double_spend_rbf

For fee estimation see

https://coinb.in/#fees

Good luck.

[BitMaxz]

If the error comes from the Bitcoin core itself and not from any block explorer there is an alternative way to broadcast it just to get rid of the error from your Bitcoin core wallet.

Like the HCP said above if you can't find the transaction to any block explorer it should be ok it means that it wasn't broadcasted yet. So if you want to send bitcoin right away and broadcast it to mainnet you should make a raw transaction as nc50lc suggestion above.

Once you get the raw transaction you can broadcast them manually to any of these links below.
- https://www.viabtc.com/tools/broadcast
- https://coinb.in/#broadcast
- https://blockchair.com/broadcast

[nc50lc]

Like the HCP said above if you can't find the transaction to any block explorer it should be ok it means that it wasn't broadcasted yet. So if you want to send bitcoin right away and broadcast it to mainnet you should make a raw transaction as nc50lc suggestion above.

I'm still waiting for his reply after trying to broadcast the transaction, but he replied with a replay of the OP.
Because it might return an error msg that could be the reason why it's "not in memory pool" if there was an issue with the txn.

@Chandu141 at least say if you have already tried the suggestions and post the results.

[curious droid]

even after many new blocks syncing , Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool

Means that the transaction isn't even in your own mempool.

You can use the console command sendrawtransaction to broadcast it ('Window->Console' to open console).
Just get that particular txn's "RAW transaction" using the right click menu and paste that after the command.
eg:

Code:

sendrawtransaction "raw_transaction_in_hex"

Do you happen to have an entry like walletbroadcast=0 on your bitcoin.conf?
If so, remove it or set it to "1".

in this tutorial it says https://github.com/chris-belcher/electrum-personal-server/blob/master/README.md

"run tor on the same machine as Electrum Personal Server. Then by default transactions will be broadcast through tor. If running tor, also set walletbroadcast=0 in your bitcoin.conf. This prevents the node from rebroadcasting transactions without tor."

But I did as you suggested and set walletbroadcast= to 1, transaction went thought, and even bitcoin core was still connected to only onion nodes.
The Question is
1. If even with walletbroadcast=1 i manage to connect to onion nodes, then what was the point of setting it to walletbroadcast=0 in the first place?
2. Do i compromise privacy when walletbroadcast is set to 0?
3. Is there a way sending transaction from Bitcoin core wallet with walletbroadcast=0 or i need to change it back and forth every time i want to send a transaction from bitcoin wallet?

[HCP]

Your problem really has nothing to do with the OPs original issue... it seems you have followed a tutorial for Electrum Personal Server and it has had unintended consequences for your Bitcoin Core wallet.

You should really start your own thread, rather than hijacking this thread.

The Question is
1. If even with walletbroadcast=1 i manage to connect to onion nodes, then what was the point of setting it to walletbroadcast=0 in the first place?

It's to prevent the node from rebroadcasting in the event that Tor is disabled/not available. It's like a "safety"... it means your privacy won't be compromised if your Tor is down for whatever reason... the node won't "accidentally" broadcast any of your transactions over clearnet.

2. Do i compromise privacy when walletbroadcast is set to 0?

No, it should do the opposite as it just prevents the wallet part from broadcasting (or rebroadcasting) transactions...

3. Is there a way sending transaction from Bitcoin core wallet with walletbroadcast=0 or i need to change it back and forth every time i want to send a transaction from bitcoin wallet?

Theoretically, you could use the RPC functionality to broadcast the transaction, as the node will still be able to send/relay transactions etc... it's just the actual wallet part of Bitcoin Core that won't "send"... or you could also try using a script like this: https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin-submittx which seems to have been purposely designed for working with "walletbroadcast=0" configs.

[nc50lc]

-snip-

But I did as you suggested and set walletbroadcast= to 1, transaction went thought, and even bitcoin core was still connected to only onion nodes.
The Question is
1. If even with walletbroadcast=1 i manage to connect to onion nodes, then what was the point of setting it to walletbroadcast=0 in the first place?
2. Do i compromise privacy when walletbroadcast is set to 0?
3. Is there a way sending transaction from Bitcoin core wallet with walletbroadcast=0 or i need to change it back and forth every time i want to send a transaction from bitcoin wallet?

Why are you referring to that tutorial? Are you using Electrum Personal Server, Yes?
Then following my reply isn't the best choice of action, it's for a different kind of issue.

• [1] I think it has something to do with "Electrum Personal Server" 's implementation of transaction broadcast through Tor,
  I'm not using EPS but based from documentations, it won't broadcast your transaction through clearnet if that config is set to '0'.
  My suggestion to OP to force it to '=1' was because some users have been adding configs into their bitcoin.conf file without knowing its function or they've used a config that will automatically disable wallet broadcast like blocksonly=1.
• [2] You're overthinking walletbroadcast, it's as simple as not automatically sending your wallet-generated transaction to your own mempool, thus, it wont be relayed to other nodes.
• [3] Send it manually using the console or through RPC command: sendrawtransaction

I'd suggest you to post your own thread in Electrum board (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=98.0) to get support from EPS users.

[curious droid]

Thank you very much HCP & nc50lc. I know understand it