Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 08:18:04 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: I'm curious about a slow transaction  (Read 1882 times)
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 01:41:48 PM
 #1

I'm curious about something.

Almost 24 hours ago I sent a transaction of 0.07 btc (without a fee) to one of my other computers to a different "account"/wallet and still after nearly 24 hours it says 0/unconfirmed.

I have the whole blockchain downloaded and 32 connections and on the receiving computer I have 8 connections and the whole blockchain. The funny thing is that I successfully sent even smaller amounts to the same computer (also without any fee) and got these pretty fast while is was waiting for the 0.07 btc transaction to get trough.

I don't know how to find the transaction hash when using the standard gui bitcoin client. But the address I tried to send the 0.07 is 1KCJ79R4CexWmqK6qa2HBeFv8bG3a3wAfX.

0.07 btc is not a big deal really, but I'm just curious, I know that a transaction can take some time but I never have to wait like ≥ 24 hours before even when being to greedy not to pay any fee. Have I been very lucky every time I sent small transactions without using fees and these have went trough pretty fast? Or am I experiencing some kind of trouble or should I just have more patience and have another cup of coffee?






1480839484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839484
Reply with quote  #2

1480839484
Report to moderator
1480839484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839484
Reply with quote  #2

1480839484
Report to moderator
1480839484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839484
Reply with quote  #2

1480839484
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480839484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839484
Reply with quote  #2

1480839484
Report to moderator
Garrett Burgwardt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 01:43:39 PM
 #2

Odds are the .07 coin tx was using relatively new coins, ones you haven't controlled for very long. The smaller transactions were probably very old coins and thus made it into a medium or even high priority slot.
Mike Hearn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 12, 2011, 04:59:49 PM
 #3

Hardly. He's spending an output that entered a block yesterday.

These priority bands are very complicated and hard to debug. If priority simply ordered transactions in a block when that block would be larger than the max size, that'd be one thing. I question whether the additional complexity is required.
Mike Hearn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 12, 2011, 05:03:55 PM
 #4

I'm wrong. ArtForz corrected me. Somehow this transaction is a double spend - it will never confirm because you're trying to spend coins that were already spent.

Are you copying wallet.dat files around, or using modified software somehow?
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 05:44:44 PM
 #5

I'm wrong. ArtForz corrected me. Somehow this transaction is a double spend - it will never confirm because you're trying to spend coins that were already spent.

Are you copying wallet.dat files around, or using modified software somehow?

How strange.
I only have my wallet.dat on my primary debian partition and on my win-xp partition (and I hardly never use the windows partition), and besides from well hidden and encrypted backups.

And I only use the official standard gui version. But I have switched between version 0.3.20.2 and 0.3.21-beta back and forth using the same .bitcoin directory lately. I'm wondering if this could have something to do with it in some way? Becuase when I did the transaction I didn't experience any problems or errors and I have more than 0.07 btc in my wallet.
Even if it's only a small sum it makes me feel a bit uncomfortable or rather confused.

Garrett Burgwardt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 06:01:51 PM
 #6

How can we be sure it's a double spend? Relevant blockexplorer links?

Not to contradict Artforzz and [mike] (who are both much smarter than I), I'd still bet on my explanation until evidence of a double spend shows up.
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 07:21:37 PM
 #7

How can we be sure it's a double spend? Relevant blockexplorer links?

Not to contradict Artforzz and [mike] (who are both much smarter than I), I'd still bet on my explanation until evidence of a double spend shows up.

If that's the case I can do post here in this thread if I get any confirmation of the transaction.

Cusipzzz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 300


View Profile
May 12, 2011, 08:04:41 PM
 #8

Yes, can someone show the raw tx details? so we can check with block explorer and anyone running a node who saw that raw 'double spend' tx? Might be informative for a lot of people here. thanks.

http://BTCSportsBet.com - The most complete bitcoin Sportsbook - All games from pro and college sports, Champions League, E-Sports, and reduced juice as well!
syn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25


View Profile
May 12, 2011, 08:11:24 PM
 #9

Here is the account in question --> http://blockexplorer.com/address/1KCJ79R4CexWmqK6qa2HBeFv8bG3a3wAfX


I will go through my nodes logs (talks to about 74 others constantly), but I need as accurate as possible the time in which you "spent" the transaction that never made the block chain.

send btc --> 1F1avjWuBy1Ah8vuEkyVDPJ93ev3unfC3J
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 12, 2011, 10:31:54 PM
 #10

Ok, a little update on this matter:

Still no confirmations.
I booted up my windows partition which uses the same wallet.dat just to check but there was no trace of the .07 transfer in my transaction history.

Gavin Andresen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


Chief Scientist


View Profile WWW
May 12, 2011, 11:55:07 PM
 #11

Your 0.07 transaction is very-low-priority, and still waiting to get in a block.  From bitcoincharts:
Code:
2011-05-11 15:34:58 2cf664377d1923089d0aed9d7aab3f8d51f69c76409a71e3d88b378a13e3612e
This is a low priority transaction.
size: 258 bytes
priority: 12,250,000
input: 0.12900000 BTC
0.12900000 BTC from 9bea18121283bc7f9618eb8b50ce94e9df4698eb51468152fa686bfe94387d2d:0 (1CM9WjjPScLSfQaYXq9YY5VgqUh6bP87rw)
output: 0.12900000 BTC
0.07000000 BTC to 1KCJ79R4CexWmqK6qa2HBeFv8bG3a3wAfX
0.05900000 BTC to 14Q7k5u5UAhEWC5E52BGwLVFKWeW3ffBtA

It might take a few days, but it will eventually get confirmed.

How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 13, 2011, 09:09:41 AM
 #12

Thank you so much for the information Gavin. Highly appreciated.
Looks like I have to be a bit more patient then  Smiley

gigabytecoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280


View Profile
May 13, 2011, 09:48:01 AM
 #13

I'm curious about something.

Almost 24 hours ago I sent a transaction of 0.07 btc (without a fee) to one of my other computers to a different "account"/wallet and still after nearly 24 hours it says 0/unconfirmed.

I have the whole blockchain downloaded and 32 connections and on the receiving computer I have 8 connections and the whole blockchain. The funny thing is that I successfully sent even smaller amounts to the same computer (also without any fee) and got these pretty fast while is was waiting for the 0.07 btc transaction to get trough.

I don't know how to find the transaction hash when using the standard gui bitcoin client. But the address I tried to send the 0.07 is 1KCJ79R4CexWmqK6qa2HBeFv8bG3a3wAfX.

0.07 btc is not a big deal really, but I'm just curious, I know that a transaction can take some time but I never have to wait like ≥ 24 hours before even when being to greedy not to pay any fee. Have I been very lucky every time I sent small transactions without using fees and these have went trough pretty fast? Or am I experiencing some kind of trouble or should I just have more patience and have another cup of coffee?







Those weren't two separate bitcoin faucet dispersions were they? 0.05 + 0.02 = 0.07?

ಠ_ಠ
divergenta
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162



View Profile
May 13, 2011, 10:34:01 AM
 #14

No it's just a single 0.07 transfer, the other ones worked just fine.




Mike Hearn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 13, 2011, 11:34:23 AM
 #15

Your 0.07 transaction is very-low-priority, and still waiting to get in a block.  From bitcoincharts:
Code:
2011-05-11 15:34:58 2cf664377d1923089d0aed9d7aab3f8d51f69c76409a71e3d88b378a13e3612e
This is a low priority transaction.
size: 258 bytes
priority: 12,250,000
input: 0.12900000 BTC
0.12900000 BTC from 9bea18121283bc7f9618eb8b50ce94e9df4698eb51468152fa686bfe94387d2d:0 (1CM9WjjPScLSfQaYXq9YY5VgqUh6bP87rw)
output: 0.12900000 BTC
0.07000000 BTC to 1KCJ79R4CexWmqK6qa2HBeFv8bG3a3wAfX
0.05900000 BTC to 14Q7k5u5UAhEWC5E52BGwLVFKWeW3ffBtA

It might take a few days, but it will eventually get confirmed.


It will never confirm because it's a double spend. Look at

http://blockexplorer.com/tx/9bea18121283bc7f9618eb8b50ce94e9df4698eb51468152fa686bfe94387d2d

Output zero is already taken. It's too bad it shows up, maybe tcatm can mark them as special in some way using the logs.
carlerha
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
May 24, 2011, 10:38:21 PM
 #16

I'm sorry for hijacking the thread. A transaction I made almost two weeks ago still has 0 confirmations in the receiving client. It's without an attached fee, but should I expect this much delay for it to be confirmed?
My client has of course catched up with the current block (126,438 as of now())
http://blockexplorer.com/t/8HRQXas8i6

carlerha
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
June 02, 2011, 11:07:16 AM
 #17

*bump* I'd be happy to get an answer here, what might be the reason for this? How can it be avoided in future transactions?

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!