Is there a miner to manually confirm a transaction for me?

[GazetaBitcoin]

Hello,

On Jan 30th this transaction was sent to my wallet: abb0a820a43e92ff9e3a1f9e6967f2c59e76b5cd1909d44c06af813e75251913. But it was never processed, due to the low fee. I tried to accelerate it with various transactions accelerators, but so far no luck. The sender is unable to use RBF.

I created this topic to kindly ask if there is a miner reading it, which could manually process my transaction.

Thanks!

[1714618899]

1714618899

[1714618899]

1714618899

[1714618899]

1714618899

[1714618899]

1714618899

[mocacinno]

You've been here a long time, i guess you already know not to trust PM's from individuals that promise to manually mine your transaction, right? You need a significant amount of hashrate to make that promise, so if the person offering you to help isn't from one of the top-10 pools, they're probably just trying to scam you.

This being said: viaBTC's free accelerator still works, aswell as their paying accelerator... However, since the used fee was < 4sat/byte the free accelerator probably won't accept your tx.

If you don't find a miner to help you, you can still wait untill the average feerate drops significantly, then attempt a CPFP. The process is pretty easy, but you'll end up paying a fee that's equal to the sum of the fee that should have been payed for the stuck transaction PLUS the fee that should be payed for the child transaction MINUS the fee that was already payed PLUS a little bit extra to be sure... It works, but at a cost... Not funny if somebody paying you cheaps out on the fee and you get stuck with the problems.

Good luck!

[cajancharles]

you can use "Child-pays-for-parent" if you are either sender/receiver.

otherwise you can use paid transaction accelerator service from:
https://pushtx.btc.com
https://pool.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator/
https://pushtx.com/

They charge reasonably high amount like  10%-15% of transaction amount.
I will be rolling out my own paid & "cheap" transaction accelerator service if there are more people who needs this service.

[BitcoinHodler]

I will be rolling out my own paid & "cheap" transaction accelerator service if there are more people who needs this service.

you can only offer this service if and only if you are running a mining pool or are solo mining bitcoin. which one are you doing?

[mocacinno]

--snip--

you can only offer this service if and only if you are running a mining pool or are solo mining bitcoin. which one are you doing?

Solo mining would only work for this enterprise if he spent millions in hardware and runs a mining farm that has a total hashrate on par with the biggest mining pools... I'd be surprised if this was the case.

An other option is if he has a deal with one of the biggest mining pools, but in this case i'd expect them to confirm they have a deal with user cajancharles

[BitMaxz]

Take note only the mining pool has full control over which transaction to be included on the block they mined.
So miners don't have control to prioritize/include a transaction they want.

I heard that you can request on F2pool to add a transaction you want but the only participant who mines on their pool can request to include a transaction to the recent block they mined.

If you are looking for miners who can manually confirm the transaction no one could do that but some miners who mine on F2pool can request to add a transaction. So I think what you need is to look for an F2pool participant and request to add your transaction, the only problem is it's hard to find a legit participant unless the miner is a well-known user here on the forum who mined on F2pool.

The only option right now is to wait for Mempool to drop the transaction fee I think around 2 days or more depending on the network.

I suggest you monitor the Mempool stats from this link below.

- https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/

Until you see the unconfirmed transaction and mempool size drop.

[cajancharles]

I will be rolling out my own paid & "cheap" transaction accelerator service if there are more people who needs this service.

you can only offer this service if and only if you are running a mining pool or are solo mining bitcoin. which one are you doing?

Collaboration with large mining pools

[PawGo]

There was similar thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5192454.0
Solved by user https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181180
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5192454.msg55853103#msg55853103

[GazetaBitcoin]

I heard that you can request on F2pool to add a transaction you want

Thank you, I'll try to contact them.

There was similar thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5192454.0
Solved by user https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181180

Thanks! I will try to contact him as well

You've been here a long time, i guess you already know not to trust PM's from individuals that promise to manually mine your transaction, right? You need a significant amount of hashrate to make that promise, so if the person offering you to help isn't from one of the top-10 pools, they're probably just trying to scam you.

Yep, I know that

This being said: viaBTC's free accelerator still works, aswell as their paying accelerator... However, since the used fee was < 4sat/byte the free accelerator probably won't accept your tx.

Yes, I saw that...

If you don't find a miner to help you, you can still wait untill the average feerate drops significantly, then attempt a CPFP. The process is pretty easy, but you'll end up paying a fee that's equal to the sum of the fee that should have been payed for the stuck transaction PLUS the fee that should be payed for the child transaction MINUS the fee that was already payed PLUS a little bit extra to be sure... It works, but at a cost... Not funny if somebody paying you cheaps out on the fee and you get stuck with the problems.

Anyway, since it looks like you're the receiver, i would recommend you to perform CPFP or/and keep the RAW transaction so you could broadcast it if the transaction never confirmed and dropped from mempool. Here's the RAW transaction,

Code:

0100000001720745d5aef829ffefea4a4d8dc59b8ef476ac5e1b35b8a962994ff80653ca362b0000006b483045022100e445310028c9b0093307151cb9c72453d01fd130264c2bae6b168d5655917072022066a2092587b000241727cbaf77e249238e55ed57e59ed403111f8d10da8c0be3012102b050ed7c305ce68a54e12e11fef7f1307ad406763b3f08542836db406dc7ccd6ffffffff01c8a90100000000001976a91498e55fd3252a56be81719a3f603f5fb69a9645bb88ac00000000

Thank you both for the suggestion... Let's see how this works...

I think this thread shouldn't be in Development & Technical Discussion section.

You are most likely right. I also hesitated before posting it here. I posted it here because I saw similar threads from the past in this section. Should I move it to Mining section...?

[GazetaBitcoin]

I heard that you can request on F2pool to add a transaction you want

Thank you, I'll try to contact them.

Unfortunately, F2Poll is unable to help. I emailed them and I received the following answer:

Sorry, we can not help you with this.

I had better expectations about the this other proposal:

There was similar thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5192454.0
Solved by user https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181180

Thanks! I will try to contact him as well [/quote]

Unfortunately, no luck here as well. neutraLTC is unable to help me, although it seems that in the past s/he was able to help the user from the above mentioned topic.


Having this said, I wonder about the following:
- is it possible that after the nodes "forget" about the respective transaction to have the funds shown again in the wallet which sent the funds?
- is it possible for the transaction to be processed at some point in the future, in case fees will get lower?

[pooya87]

Unfortunately, no luck here as well. neutraLTC is unable to help me, although it seems that in the past s/he was able to help the user from the above mentioned topic.

The two cases are different. The link here was a non-standard but high fee transaction which needed manual submission to be mined but yours is a standard low fee transaction that doesn't give enough incentive for miners to pick it up.

- is it possible that after the nodes "forget" about the respective transaction to have the funds shown again in the wallet which sent the funds?
- is it possible for the transaction to be processed at some point in the future, in case fees will get lower?

- Yes. Specially since their mempool grows and they end up dropping the low fee transactions then the same inputs can be spent again with a higher fee. Otherwise you can re-broadcast this forever until it confirms.
- Considering that it is paying about 3.6 satoshi/byte then yes it is possible that at some point when fees drop to 1 this tx would be picked up by any miner.

[GazetaBitcoin]

The two cases are different. The link here was a non-standard but high fee transaction which needed manual submission to be mined but yours is a standard low fee transaction that doesn't give enough incentive for miners to pick it up.

Oh, OK, I understand now.

Yes. Specially since their mempool grows and they end up dropping the low fee transactions then the same inputs can be spent again with a higher fee.

Just need more clarity here: by this, you mean that if a transaction is "forgotten" by nodes, the funds will reappear in the sender's wallet? As of now, that wallet is empty. Will the funds become available in the wallet after a while?

Otherwise you can re-broadcast this forever until it confirms.

But if I keep trying to accelerate the transaction through various accelerators won't that make it more difficult for the nodes to forget it?

Considering that it is paying about 3.6 satoshi/byte then yes it is possible that at some point when fees drop to 1 this tx would be picked up by any miner.

Then it's either I wait for the fees to drop or for the nodes to forget the transaction...

[DireWolfM14]

Then it's either I wait for the fees to drop or for the nodes to forget the transaction...

You have one other option:

Use coin control, select to spend from the unconfirmed transaction, create another transaction with higher fees, and broadcast that.  Currently mempool is averaging about 110 sats per byte, if you set your child transaction to about 200 sats per byte you're looking at a fee of 0.000384.  That's about $18 USD at the moment.

[pooya87]

Just need more clarity here: by this, you mean that if a transaction is "forgotten" by nodes, the funds will reappear in the sender's wallet? As of now, that wallet is empty. Will the funds become available in the wallet after a while?

Depends on the wallet type you are using. A full node shouldn't forget on its own, you have to manually "abandon" it and then create a new transaction spending the same UTXO.
A light client has to rely on other nodes, depending on which node it is connected to it may or may not see the UTXO as spent. But it has to rely on them to "forget" it so that the wallet can spend the UTXO again.

But if I keep trying to accelerate the transaction through various accelerators won't that make it more difficult for the nodes to forget it?

You usually submit the transaction ID in an accelerator and they would only prioritize that tx if it is in their mempool. They don't change anything else as far as I can tell. If the tx remains unconfirmed it can be forgotten by the network.

Then it's either I wait for the fees to drop or for the nodes to forget the transaction...

Yes. That's the easiest option. You can try double spending the same outputs but it could be harder if you haven't worked with transaction signing before.

[GazetaBitcoin]

You have one other option [...]

Unfortunately I can't do that... I am the receiver, not the sender. And the sender used Blockchain.com for sending funds. I don't even know if this wallet allows you to have your private keys (I remember that in the past you did not have access to them) and even if now you can access the private keys, I doubt the sender would export them, import them in Electrum and then perform all this operation...

Depends on the wallet type you are using. A full node shouldn't forget on its own, you have to manually "abandon" it and then create a new transaction spending the same UTXO.
A light client has to rely on other nodes, depending on which node it is connected to it may or may not see the UTXO as spent. But it has to rely on them to "forget" it so that the wallet can spend the UTXO again.

As I wrote above, the sender used Blockchain.com wallet, and this is not a node itself... In this case do you think it;s possible for the sender to see the funds again in the wallet after some time? And if so, how long this time can be? The transaction was made 16 days ago and still, the coins are not shown again in the sender's wallet.

Then it's either I wait for the fees to drop or for the nodes to forget the transaction...

Yes. That's the easiest option. You can try double spending the same outputs but it could be harder if you haven't worked with transaction signing before.

Only if I could do that... but I can;t, as I am not in control of the sender's wallet... What I don;t understand though is this: if there is a chance for the network to forget the transaction then how can it be processed if the fees drop...? These two ideas seem to contradict one another. At least, this is what I understand: so, if I wait for fees to drop, the transaction will eventually be processed. But this implies that it won't be forgotten by the network, yes? And the opposite: if it gets forgotten, then it will never be processed, no matter if the fees drop... Am I missing something here...?

[ranochigo]

As I wrote above, the sender used Blockchain.com wallet, and this is not a node itself... In this case do you think it;s possible for the sender to see the funds again in the wallet after some time? And if so, how long this time can be? The transaction was made 16 days ago and still, the coins are not shown again in the sender's wallet.

Might be never. Blockchain.com can very well be rebroadcasting the transaction from time to time and it might never get dropped out of the mempool. Not sure what their wallet behaviour is but given that it has been 16 days, I suspect that is the case.

Only if I could do that... but I can;t, as I am not in control of the sender's wallet... What I don;t understand though is this: if there is a chance for the network to forget the transaction then how can it be processed if the fees drop...? These two ideas seem to contradict one another. At least, this is what I understand: so, if I wait for fees to drop, the transaction will eventually be processed. But this implies that it won't be forgotten by the network, yes? And the opposite: if it gets forgotten, then it will never be processed, no matter if the fees drop... Am I missing something here...?

The transactions tends to drop out of the node's mempool after two weeks so if every node received the transaction at the same time, it would have been dropped. Problem here is that it could be kept within the node's mempool if someone broadcasts the transaction again to ensure that it never drops out of the mempool.

There's no such thing as being forgotten by the network. The miners simply chooses the transaction that they see fit; it could very well still be mined by a miner after you see it disappear from the wallet.

If you're the receiver, I can't see how you can't spend the unconfirmed transaction to do a child pay for parent as mentioned by DireWolfM14. The caveat is that this can take a huge part of your payment and isn't fair for the cost to be borne by you.

[pooya87]

As I wrote above, the sender used Blockchain.com wallet, and this is not a node itself... In this case do you think it;s possible for the sender to see the funds again in the wallet after some time? And if so, how long this time can be? The transaction was made 16 days ago and still, the coins are not shown again in the sender's wallet.

I don't think blockchain.come rebroadcasts the transactions on its own but I don't use it so I can't be sure. That means the funds should be back in the sender's wallet and they should be able to spend them again.
But also it is possible that as soon as user logs into their account and the wallet sees there is an unconfirmed tx that doesn't exist in the mempool it could resend that tx again.

Only if I could do that... but I can;t, as I am not in control of the sender's wallet... What I don;t understand though is this: if there is a chance for the network to forget the transaction then how can it be processed if the fees drop...? These two ideas seem to contradict one another. At least, this is what I understand: so, if I wait for fees to drop, the transaction will eventually be processed. But this implies that it won't be forgotten by the network, yes? And the opposite: if it gets forgotten, then it will never be processed, no matter if the fees drop... Am I missing something here...?

About "forgetting":
The default behavior of majority of them is to either drop transactions that didn't confirm in 14 days or drop transactions that have lowest fees when they run out of memory (the defined mempool size).
But since the network is decentralized and there are lots of bitcoin nodes with lots of different options there is always a chance that some nodes somewhere still keep the transaction in their mempool and propagate it when any node connects to them and asks for a list of txs in their mempool.

But you are correct, if the network "forgets" about that transaction (which is usually the case when fees are constantly rising) then that tx won't confirm since it won't exist when the fees drop and user has to manually create a new one or resend the same tx.

[hosseinimr93]

You have one other option [...]

Unfortunately I can't do that... I am the receiver, not the sender.

You can.
The method mentioned by DireWolfM14 is called child pay for parent (CPFP) and can be implemented by the receiver.
To do CPFP, the only thing you need to do is spend the unconfirmed output with a high fee.

If you spend the unconfirmed output using a high fee, miners will be interested to include your transaction into a block and since the parent of that transaction is unconfirmed, they have to include the unconfirmed parent into a same block as well.

Just note that the fee of the transaction made from the unconfirmed output must be that high, so miners pick both of transactions.

Let's say you have received transaction A. Its fee is F_A and its size is S_A.
You can spend one of unconfirmed outputs of the transaction A  in transaction B and pay F_B for it as fee. (Size of transaction B is S_B.)

The total fee rate for these two transactions will be ^(F_A+F_B)/_(SA+SB).

If ^(F_A+F_B)/_(SA+SB) is big enough, miners will include both of transactions in a same block.

[HCP]

Blockchain.com shows the time it last "received" a transaction... currently, your transaction is showing with a datetime received (in UTC) of:

Received Time: 2021-02-11 17:05

BTC.com doesn't have it
Blockchair says: Time (UTC) 2021-01-30 16:01(18 days ago)
Blockcypher doesn't have it
Blockstream.info doesn't have it

and my local node here doesn't have it either:

getrawtransaction abb0a820a43e92ff9e3a1f9e6967f2c59e76b5cd1909d44c06af813e75251913

No such mempool or blockchain transaction. Use gettransaction for wallet transactions. (code -5)

I suspect that blockchain.com rebroadcasts transactions... at least to it's own mempool... but the transaction is not currently "well propagated". Given that most nodes seem to have dropped this transaction, the odds of it being confirmed in a block are actually relatively poor.

Indeed... it seems that your transaction has been a "victim" of the "mempool min fee":

Code:

sendrawtransaction 0100000001720745d5aef829ffefea4a4d8dc59b8ef476ac5e1b35b8a962994ff80653ca362b0000006b483045022100e445310028c9b0093307151cb9c72453d01fd130264c2bae6b168d5655917072022066a2092587b000241727cbaf77e249238e55ed57e59ed403111f8d10da8c0be3012102b050ed7c305ce68a54e12e11fef7f1307ad406763b3f08542836db406dc7ccd6ffffffff01c8a90100000000001976a91498e55fd3252a56be81719a3f603f5fb69a9645bb88ac00000000

mempool min fee not met, 707 < 806 (code -26)

Given the massive uptick in activity with breaking the $50k barrier etc... it seems that transactions below 4 sats/byte (!!?! ) are being "purged": https://statoshi.info/d/000000020/memory-pool?orgId=1

[mico.serge]

I will be rolling out my own paid & "cheap" transaction accelerator service if there are more people who needs this service.

you can only offer this service if and only if you are running a mining pool or are solo mining bitcoin. which one are you doing?

Indeed, for sure his dm has loads of scammers already