Unconfirmed paper wallets sweep, "unconfirmed parent" afterwards ...

[xkftm]

hey guys, i guess i need help/advice. :/

i swept some paper wallet keys (using 80sat/b fee), transaction (A), and didn’t wait for confirmation. created a new transaction (B) to pay (from half of the paper wallet amount) to kraken.

transaction A is stuck "unconfirmed" now for 6+ hours, "position in memepool 15.3MB from tip". transaction B tells me "unconfirmed parent" (obviously) with 137sat/b. i’m not sure what i can do now to speed this up (or to fix it, at all). there’s no RBF- oder CPFP-option on transaction A to be seen, and im not sure if "increasing the fee" on transaction B (or trying to cancel it with "double spend" option) would clear this up or make it worse.

any suggestions?

electrum 4.1.2, windows, ..

thanks so much in advance!

[BlackHatCoiner]

If you can't increase the fee of your first transaction, there's no direct point of increasing the second transaction. Not sure if miners will include a parent transaction just because there's a child transaction paying a lot in fees. As it seems, you've chosen 137 sat/byte and it hasn't helped.

As far as I can see from mempool.space, the low priority is 101 sat/byte, so I guess you'll get your 80 sat/byte transaction confirmed within the next few hours. Nothing to worry about if you're not in hurry.

I guess that since it's a paper wallet, the first transaction is a legacy one, which makes things worse. 

[xkftm]

Nothing to worry about if you're not in hurry.

i’m not, i was just worried because it "never took so long" in the past (and additionally apparently i don’t know what i’m doing). :-)

(so cancelling the second tx by using the "double spend" feature wouldn’t help as well? so that afterwards i could increase the fee on the first one maybe?)

I guess that since it's a paper wallet, the first transaction is a legacy one, which makes things worse.  

not sure what this means (?) - i just swept all the keys in electrum (worked with other wallet keys just fine yesterday, confirmed and ready to spend after 1-2 hours). but as long as "just wait until it clears up" still stands, i’ll try not to worry too much now ..

thank you!

[hosseinimr93]

Both of transactions will likely be confirmed soon.
Assuming your paper wallet address is legacy (the worst case), your first transaction should be 192 vbyte.
Your second transaction should have 1 input and 2 output and is 142 vbyte. (As electrum 4.1.2 create a native segwit wallet by default, I assumed your address is native segwit.)

The effective fee you paid for these two transaction is:

(80*192) + (137*142) / (192+142) = 104 sat/vbyte.

Your transactions are now about 2 vMB from the tip and they will likely be confirmed soon in a same block.

Note that you could import the private key of your paper wallet instead of sweeping that and pay fee only for one transaction.
By sweeping the paper wallet, you actually waste some money.

[Charles-Tim]

If you can't increase the fee of your first transaction, there's no direct point of increasing the second transaction. Not sure if miners will include a parent transaction just because there's a child transaction paying a lot in fees. As it seems, you've chosen 137 sat/byte and it hasn't helped.

If the child transaction is paying high fee that can get both the child and parent transaction confirmed, miner will not have option than to confirm the parent transaction along with the child transaction, which means both transactions will be confirmed at ones as a result of the high fee paid for the child transaction that can get two (child and parent) transactions confirmed.

[BlackHatCoiner]

i’m not, i was just worried because it "never took so long" in the past (and additionally apparently i don’t know what i’m doing). :-)

When was the “past”? A year ago, I could have my transaction confirmed within an hour with 1 sat/byte. Lots of things happened this year and yeah. There are, right now, 252,909 transactions in the mempool of my node. Remember, the more the transactions the greater the fee.

so cancelling the second tx by using the "double spend" feature wouldn’t help as well?

No, it won't help you. You want to get your first transaction confirmed. The second doesn't affect the first one.

so that afterwards i could increase the fee on the first one maybe?

But, you said that there's no RBF. You can't increase the fee if you have signed that replacing by fee isn't acceptable.

not sure what this means (?)

A legacy transaction is one that has inputs from legacy addresses (the ones that start with “1”). Well, if you use this type of addresses, you'll pay more in fees.

[BitMaxz]

(so cancelling the second tx by using the "double spend" feature wouldn’t help as well? so that afterwards i could increase the fee on the first one maybe?)

If there is a double-spend feature then try it on the first transaction to cancel it and increase the transaction fee when you want to send it again.
Make sure to use the recommended fee from https://mempool.space/ if you are in hurry use the higher priority fee.


Another thing that I would like to suggest is to try to submit your transaction with this tool below. It's free for 0.0001BTC/KB transactions fee

- https://www.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator?lang=en_US

It might help to speed up your transaction.

[hosseinimr93]

If there is a double-spend feature then try it on the first transaction to cancel it and increase the transaction fee when you want to send it again.

As already stated by OP, the first transaction hasn't been flagged as RBF. Therefore, it's impossible to cancel that transaction.
By cancelling a transaction, you actually replace it with a new one to yourself with a higher fee. So, you can't cancel a non-RBF transaction.

And even if the first transaction was RBF, it was not a good idea to cancel the transaction and make a new transaction with a higher fee.
If you do so, you will have to pay for two transactions instead of one transaction. And as OP needs to make another transaction to Kraken, he/she would actually have to pay for three transactions.

[xkftm]

Assuming your paper wallet address is legacy (the worst case), your first transaction should be 192 vbyte.

it is in fact legacy, and evenworse ... 50 of those (paper wallets/addresses) to be merged into a single transaction. :-| i guess that doesn’t make it easier/faster, huh? :-)

but, anyway, as long as there’s hope (that it will confirm "some time"), i’m fine.

Note that you could import the private key of your paper wallet instead of sweeping that and pay fee only for one transaction.
By sweeping the paper wallet, you actually waste some money.

in my understanding importing those keys would have meant i couldn’t have spent them "in fractions", only in total!? that’s why i swept them. but i guess it doesn’t matter anymore now anyway.

But, you said that there's no RBF. You can't increase the fee if you have signed that replacing by fee isn't acceptable.

electrum doesn’t show any RBF options on that first transaction, yes. i was thinking by deleting/cancelling the second transaction i could "enable" the ability to use RBF on the first one maybe ..

If there is a double-spend feature then try it on the first transaction to cancel it and increase the transaction fee when you want to send it again.

RBF is possible at the second transaction (unconfirmed parent) only, electrum tells me. not at the paper-wallet-sweep (unconfirmed before) unfortunately. i would easily cancel the kraken-transaction (it’s not urgent at all) if i could get access to the coins from my paper wallets (first transaction) though ..

Another thing that I would like to suggest is to try to submit your transaction with this tool below. It's free for 0.0001BTC/KB transactions fee
- https://www.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator?lang=en_US

"timeout of 10000ms exceeded", every time i try ..

anyway, thanks so much guys, i’ll just wait a bit more and keep my fingers crossed. will get back to you for some more help if this doesn’t confirm in a few days though. :-)

[xkftm]

If there is a double-spend feature then try it on the first transaction to cancel it and increase the transaction fee when you want to send it again.

As already stated by OP, the first transaction hasn't been flagged as RBF. Therefore, it's impossible to cancel that transaction.

actually, electrum doesn’t show any RBF option there. but blockchair as well as mempool.space tell me "RBF enabled" looking at that transaction. not sure why (or what that helps me) though. :-)

[BlackHatCoiner]

it is in fact legacy, and evenworse ... 50 of those (paper wallets/addresses) to be merged into a single transaction.

Ouch!

electrum doesn’t show any RBF options on that first transaction, yes. i was thinking by deleting/cancelling the second transaction i could "enable" the ability to use RBF on the first one maybe ...

Well, that ain't good. No, you can't do anything with the second transaction that will “enable” any ability for the first transaction. You signed it, you broadcasted. That's all folks.

RBF is possible at the second transaction (unconfirmed parent) only, electrum tells me. not at the paper-wallet-sweep (unconfirmed before) unfortunately. i would easily cancel the kraken-transaction (it’s not urgent at all) if i could get access to the coins from my paper wallets (first transaction) though ..

Probably electrum doesn't seem to have RBF enabled by default once you sweep a paper wallet. I guess that for the other one (kraken tx), had it normally. If you aren't too sure for both of them, note that you can view your transaction on electrum by right clicking on it and then “View Transaction”. Here's the RBF enablement:

will get back to you for some more help if this doesn’t confirm in a few days though. :-)

It may take days considering the fact that it's a huge legacy transaction.

[hosseinimr93]

it is in fact legacy, and evenworse ... 50 of those (paper wallets/addresses) to be merged into a single transaction. :-| i guess that doesn’t make it easier/faster, huh? :-)

You mean you entered 50 private keys when using the "Sweep" feature. Right?

If that's the case, your first transaction should be 3400 vbyte.

So, the effective fee rate is:

(80*3400) + (137*142) / (3400+142) = 82 sat/vbyte.

If you are not in hurry, just wait.
If you want your transactions get confirmed soon, you can bump the fee of the second transaction.

Currently, you need the fee rate of about 110 sat/vbyte for getting a fast confirmation (in 1-2 blocks)

(80*3400) + (X*142) / (3400+142) = 110 sat/vbyte.

X= 828 sat/vbyte

For getting a fast confirmation, you need to bump the fee of the second transaction to 828 sat/vbyte.
This will cost you 98122 satoshi (about 39 dollar)

[xkftm]

Probably electrum doesn't seem to have RBF enabled by default once you sweep a paper wallet. I guess that for the other one (kraken tx), had it normally. If you aren't too sure for both of them, note that you can view your transaction on electrum by right clicking on it and then “View Transaction”. Here's the RBF enablement:

at this screen even electrum tells me "RBF enabled". for both transactions. but no option when right-clicking the first transaction to "do" it.

It may take days considering the fact that it's a huge legacy transaction.

as long as it DOES work .. sigh. well. what can i do. :/

(i’m kinda hesitating to post the txid here because it’s a rather huge transaction. but would that help in diagnosing things?)

You mean you entered 50 private keys when using the "Sweep" feature. Right?
If that's the case, your first transaction should be 3400 vbyte.
So, the effective fee rate is:
(80*3400) + (137*142) / (3400+142) = 82 sat/vbyte.

yes, and that (82 sat/vbyte) is also what mempool.space tells me when i view the transaction.

If you want your transactions get confirmed soon, you can bump the fee of the second transaction.
For getting a fast confirmation, you need to bump the fee of the second transaction to 828 sat/vbyte.
This will cost you 98122 satoshi (about 39 dollar)

as i’m not familiar with "vbyte" yet, does that mean i can "increase fee" on the second transaction using electrum and set it to .. 828 sat/byte?

[LoyceV]

(i’m kinda hesitating to post the txid here because it’s a rather huge transaction. but would that help in diagnosing things?)

Posting the transaction is bad for your privacy, that's all.

[hosseinimr93]

does that mean i can "increase fee" on the second transaction using electrum and set it to .. 828 sat/byte?

Yes, you can increase the fee.
To do so, just right-click on your transaction and select "Increase fee". A new window will pop-up and you can enter the new fee rate.
As calculated in my previous post, this will cost you about 39 dollar.
If you are not in hurry, just wait.

Note that the required fee is dynamic and can change over time.

[xkftm]

If you are not in hurry, just wait.

i’ll wait for now. if it’s still stuck in - let’s say - a few days, i’ll increase the fee on that second transaction.
(i guess i was wondering what the difference is between vbyte and byte there, i mean, if 828sat/vbyte is the "same" as sat/byte, but i guess i’ll have time to google and educate myself in the upcoming nervewrecking days.) :-)

again, thank you so much!

[hosseinimr93]

(i guess i was wondering what the difference is between vbyte and byte there, i mean, if 828sat/vbyte is the "same" as sat/vbyte, but i guess i’ll have time to google and educate myself in the upcoming nervewrecking days.) :-)

Miners prioritize transactions based on sat/vbyte not sat/byte.  

If you send bitcoin from a legacy address (an address starting with 1), your transaction size will be equal to its virtual size and there won't be any difference between sat/byte and sat/vbyte.
If you send bitcoin from a nested segwit address (an address stating with 3) or from a native segwit address (an address  starting with bc1), your transaction will have a lower virtual size and the fee per vbyte will be higher than the fee per byte.

In fact, by using segwit addresses, you will get some discount from miners.

Your first transaction has 50 inputs and 1 outputs and you paid 80 sat/vbyte as transaction fee.
If you had used native segwit addresses instead of legacy addresses, its virtual size would be about 3400 vbyte instead of 7400 vbyte and you could save about 0.0032 BTC.

[Abdussamad]

If you can't increase the fee of your first transaction, there's no direct point of increasing the second transaction. Not sure if miners will include a parent transaction just because there's a child transaction paying a lot in fees.

yes they will. that's essentially what child pays for parent is.

[nc50lc]

-snip- (i guess i was wondering what the difference is between vbyte and byte there, i mean, if 828sat/vbyte is the "same" as sat/byte, but i guess i’ll have time to google and educate myself in the upcoming nervewrecking days.) :-)

Take note that Electrum shows the fee rate in sat/byte but technically, it's sat/vbyte.
The developers' reason AFAIK is: its "misleading newbies" which IMO not mostly the case.

[bob123]

in my understanding importing those keys would have meant i couldn’t have spent them "in fractions", only in total!? that’s why i swept them. but i guess it doesn’t matter anymore now anyway.

That's not the case.
Importing the key means your wallet (electrum) now can spend all the coins from your paper wallet. Whether in 1 or in 100 transactions doesn't matter.

A sweep actually is an import followed by a transaction (full amount) to yourself.
If your goal is to send coins from a paper wallet to X, then you'd always be better off just importing the key and creating the transaction to X yourself.