-
Why it won't last forever 
? 40 sat/byte that would be 0.6$/per transaction if I'm correct...Are we going to see transactions that cost 10$-50$ and barely gets confirmed again like last year 
? 
Topic: [Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs! - page 59. (Read 88546 times)
August 31, 2018, 01:55:34 PM
? 40 sat/byte that would be 0.6$/per transaction if I'm correct...Are we going to see transactions that cost 10$-50$ and barely gets confirmed again like last year ? 
August 22, 2018, 07:46:41 AM
Relevant information:
Default fees are proposed to be lowered in Bitcoin 0.18.0
Basically, the minimum will drop from 1sat/vbyte to 0.2sat/vbyte.
0.18.0 is scheduled for release in March 2019, which assumes nothing delays the release. And it may take time for the full effects be felt on the network, as miners may still refuse transactions less than 1sat/vbyte for a while (until a large enough backlog of < 1sat/vbyte transactions develops, I should imagine). Maybe this time next year we could be celebrating even cheaper fees
Default fees are proposed to be lowered in Bitcoin 0.18.0
Basically, the minimum will drop from 1sat/vbyte to 0.2sat/vbyte.
0.18.0 is scheduled for release in March 2019, which assumes nothing delays the release. And it may take time for the full effects be felt on the network, as miners may still refuse transactions less than 1sat/vbyte for a while (until a large enough backlog of < 1sat/vbyte transactions develops, I should imagine). Maybe this time next year we could be celebrating even cheaper fees
August 20, 2018, 12:23:31 AM
You might want to put the date in the subject of the 1st post.
I've added the month to the title. Fees have been low on most days for the past half year.I also noticed the OP still said "20 sat/byte can confirm within 3 hours". When I created that thread, that was a really low value. Now, 1 sat/byte is likely to be enough. I've updated this and a few other small details.
Quote
Or see if there is a way to sticky this.
Only Mods can do that. 
August 19, 2018, 09:06:04 PM
You might want to put the date in the subject of the 1st post.
Or see if there is a way to sticky this.
This way when someone is scrolling through the forum they might get the bump to say "Oh, that's right I have all this dust to merge into 1 address. I know fees are low today (19-Aug) and you know fees are low today, posting the last date would help the casual user / person who browses the forum to know that fees are low today.
-Dave
Or see if there is a way to sticky this.
This way when someone is scrolling through the forum they might get the bump to say "Oh, that's right I have all this dust to merge into 1 address. I know fees are low today (19-Aug) and you know fees are low today, posting the last date would help the casual user / person who browses the forum to know that fees are low today.
-Dave
August 04, 2018, 07:52:24 AM
yes I was doing some tests I have TX that are
Total Input 0.07330624 BTC
Total Output 0.07327012 BTC
Fees 0.00003612 BTC
Fee per byte 14.054 sat/B
Time to confirm - + 10 Minutes 43 Sec
and I tested another
Total Input 0.11017229 BTC
Total Output 0.11016775 BTC
Fees 0.00000454 BTC
Fee per byte 1.816 sat/B
Time to confirm - + 27 Minutes 12 Sec
Both tx's were broadcast after last block announced for comparison. While the lower fee TX was for higher amount was interesting to see position from tip move for both TX
I do agree lower fee TX is what people want like you said in original post some people leave it to tug of war game and let wallet decided. many just send and forget.
Total Input 0.07330624 BTC
Total Output 0.07327012 BTC
Fees 0.00003612 BTC
Fee per byte 14.054 sat/B
Time to confirm - + 10 Minutes 43 Sec
and I tested another
Total Input 0.11017229 BTC
Total Output 0.11016775 BTC
Fees 0.00000454 BTC
Fee per byte 1.816 sat/B
Time to confirm - + 27 Minutes 12 Sec
Both tx's were broadcast after last block announced for comparison. While the lower fee TX was for higher amount was interesting to see position from tip move for both TX
I do agree lower fee TX is what people want like you said in original post some people leave it to tug of war game and let wallet decided. many just send and forget.
August 04, 2018, 07:28:43 AM
from 5-15 sato/byte you can still be positon close to the tip for the next block.
If you pay that much, you're still overpaying. I just made this transaction, which confirmed in 9 minutes with just 1.151 sat/byte. That's $0.04 to send funds to 10 legacy addresses. August 04, 2018, 07:21:21 AM
Very good write up and topic I like to keep my eye on the blocks and the unconfirmed rate and wait for a suitable time to send the transactions helps even with low fee waiting untill a block is announced on the explorer and sending at this moment I find even with the lower end of the scale from 5-15 sato/byte you can still be positon close to the tip for the next block.
@LoyceV best consolidate those euros
@LoyceV best consolidate those euros
July 03, 2018, 08:36:42 AM
And now that I'm thinking about it, what fee information would miners see/use?
that is a good question. and the answer is nobody knows. they don't run the same software sometimes, it usually is their own modification and they all have their own personal settings.
i have had my transaction skipped over because of seemingly having lower fee like this case of yours in the past but not so much recently.
July 03, 2018, 02:03:32 AM
Just to report, I made a 0.45 sat/byte transaction yesterday,
are you sure that you are not using blockchain.info (.com now) for checking your fee? because they have not yet implemented SegWit and if the transaction you made is the one that i am looking at you did actually pay 1 satoshi/vByte which is what matters. blockchain.info uses your raw tx size 2601 and then they divide the total fee by it 1232/2601=0.47
but the problem is they should divide your virtual size by it 1232/(4917/4) = 1.002
virtual tx size = weight (4917) /4
if i am correct then when you preview your tx in your Electrum you should see the fee as 1
You are correct, pooya. The transaction details in Electrum are, indeed, correct. Another one of my assumptions disproved. I used blockchair to view the tx details though - and I do now see that the kVB fee is 1.002 sats/byte. I'd always just looked at the fee per kB line, so, learn today that I might have "overpaid" on some older transactions, haha.
And now that I'm thinking about it, what fee information would miners see/use?
I'll just share the tx here anyway: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/b471e34fbcf0e485e283aeabf2c815120fda31c1f6dc7bb10c376143b93952e0
On another note, I made another 1 sat/byte tx yesterday and it's now 14 hours unconfirmed. Been a while since I had to wait that long, tempted to just never open Electrum to see how long it could stay that way.
July 02, 2018, 10:39:36 PM
Just to report, I made a 0.45 sat/byte transaction yesterday,
are you sure that you are not using blockchain.info (.com now) for checking your fee? because they have not yet implemented SegWit and if the transaction you made is the one that i am looking at you did actually pay 1 satoshi/vByte which is what matters. blockchain.info uses your raw tx size 2601 and then they divide the total fee by it 1232/2601=0.47
but the problem is they should divide your virtual size by it 1232/(4917/4) = 1.002
virtual tx size = weight (4917) /4
if i am correct then when you preview your tx in your Electrum you should see the fee as 1
July 02, 2018, 12:18:35 PM
Just to report, I made a 0.45 sat/byte transaction yesterday
Are you sure it's sat/byte, and not sat per weight unit? As far as I know, anything under 1 sat/byte isn't broadcasted.Quote
These next-to-nothing days won't last, I suspect.
Many blocks are full already, so it doesn't take much to have a shortage of blockspace again.Yes. I just checked, because you're right actually. Electrum won't allow to broadcast below 1 sat/byte, but like I said, I guess I stumbled on a bug where, after previewing, I messed around with inputs, resulting in the size increase. Didn't actually mean to game the wallet, I just assumed the fee would increase automatically with size as I have settings at 1 sat/byte. I don't worry since I have RBF to fall back on.
It was only after I signed and broadcast that I realised this.
July 02, 2018, 07:20:12 AM
Just to report, I made a 0.45 sat/byte transaction yesterday
Are you sure it's sat/byte, and not sat per weight unit? As far as I know, anything under 1 sat/byte isn't broadcasted.Quote
These next-to-nothing days won't last, I suspect.
Many blocks are full already, so it doesn't take much to have a shortage of blockspace again. July 02, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Just to report, I made a 0.45 sat/byte transaction yesterday, a minor accident: originally set it for 1 sat/byte but then later added some inputs and forgot to recalculate the size (it appears Electrum doesn't recalculate if you play around with inputs AFTER previewing). As a result, size more than doubled without updating, more than halving my fee.
Still, that confirmed in 2 blocks (unknown pool on blockchain.info, so not sure who picked it up). The previous block had to wait almost half an hour too, so that probably contributed to "the delay", otherwise, safe to say, 1 sat/byte is still going to get confirmation in under an hour.
These next-to-nothing days won't last, I suspect.
Still, that confirmed in 2 blocks (unknown pool on blockchain.info, so not sure who picked it up). The previous block had to wait almost half an hour too, so that probably contributed to "the delay", otherwise, safe to say, 1 sat/byte is still going to get confirmation in under an hour.
These next-to-nothing days won't last, I suspect.
June 08, 2018, 01:02:51 PM
Could you let me know if Coinbase is a segwit enabled wallet? If not pls provide some examples for such wallets.
Coinbase is not advised as a 'wallet'.
A real 'wallet' does give (only) you full access of the private keys.
When storing coins on coinbase you don't actually have access to the private keys, therefore effectively not owning any bitcoin. You are trusting coinbase to hold your coins.
The best would be to visit https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet and look through the wallets available there.
If you don't want to download and process the whole blockchain (~170 GB), a lightweight client (e.g. electrum: https://electrum.org/#home) would be the most suitable for you.
The most secure on the other hand would be a hardware wallet. The most used are made by ledger and trezor.
Electrum, ledgers and trezors hardware wallets do all support segwit. But electrum is currently the only ony of these three which provides native segwit (bech32) addresses.
Trezor/Ledger do support nested segwit (P2PKH nested in P2SH ). Both are segwit, but bech32 is slightly 'better'.
June 08, 2018, 12:43:50 PM
Excellent post with good information for both old and new users. I'd recommend consolidating your bitcoin into a segwit enabled wallet for further savings on fees, also future proofing yourself to enable use of the lightning network when it is implemented at your exchange/favourite store.
Hi there, thank you for your input on the thread! I am very new to cryptocurrency investing. Could you let me know if Coinbase is a segwit enabled wallet? If not pls provide some examples for such wallets.
May 23, 2018, 09:41:08 AM
as usual bitcoin falls and low fees, bitcoin grows and charges large. You need to go when the fees for transactions are very low and when the growth begins and the fees become record high, this will be the signal for the sale of bitcoin. And so on a circle ... 
You forgot to mention that the biggest spikes of transaction fees were at the time when Bitcoin Cash was being over advertised. Coincidence? Maybe, we can't be sure, but it has happened a lot in the past. We have chosen SegWit and Lightning Network to be our scaling solutions for some time. It's still too early to make any conclusions, but it looks like we are on a good way while Bitcoin Cash "developers" are increasing the blocksize. Prepare for the next fee rise.
May 16, 2018, 12:49:50 PM
Consolidate Bump!
About two weeks ago, I saw recommended fees rise up to 40 sat/byte again when blocks were full. Fees are low again, but it won't last forever.
Ok, papa! Now it's your time to take that money and turn those eurocrap coins into bitcoin for your own son! He did his part now it's yours. If you do that I might add some bits if you like About two weeks ago, I saw recommended fees rise up to 40 sat/byte again when blocks were full. Fees are low again, but it won't last forever.
I'm an eager supporters of youngsters entering the Bitcoin world. PM me if you wish
May 10, 2018, 03:01:03 AM
@nc50lc: Your transaction probably had 1 sat/byte, as most nodes don't accept anything lower. That makes it 0.5 sat/WU.
Zero fee transactions are very unlikely to be broadcasted and mined.
I'm happy to see this thread is over 3 months old now, and fees are still low.
Zero fee transactions are very unlikely to be broadcasted and mined.
I'm happy to see this thread is over 3 months old now, and fees are still low.
May 10, 2018, 02:51:27 AM
Last week, I saw recommended fees rise up to 40 sat/byte again when blocks were full. Fees are low again, but it won't last forever.
I can confirm this, I just recently tried to consolidate 3 inputs (SegWit) with 0.5sat/byte tx fee (Electrum approx it as "within the next 25 blocks")and it got included in a block right after <10minutes, literally the next block after I broadcast the transaction.
I'm seeing blocks with 51 transactions right now (#522030)
With that, even 0sat/byte can be confirmed within hours (but I'm not recommending it).
April 12, 2018, 09:59:08 PM
Fully endorse this... Consolidation of UTXOs and switching to SegWit is a "Good Idea"™
This is how quickly the fees can start to spike when BTC goes on a wee pump... Someone decided they needed to pay 1400+ sats/byte fee!
#theFOMOisReal
This is how quickly the fees can start to spike when BTC goes on a wee pump... Someone decided they needed to pay 1400+ sats/byte fee!
#theFOMOisReal
Jump to: