[Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs! - page 59.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: buwaytress on July 03, 2018, 02:03:32 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.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: pooya87 on July 02, 2018, 10:39:36 PM

Quote from: buwaytress on July 02, 2018, 07:16:49 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.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: buwaytress on July 02, 2018, 07:16:49 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

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: LoyceV on July 02, 2018, 07:20:12 AM

Quote from: buwaytress on July 02, 2018, 07:16:49 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.

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.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: buwaytress on July 02, 2018, 07:16:49 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.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

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.

bob123

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 2481

Quote from: sue1981 on June 08, 2018, 12:43:50 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'.

sue1981

newbie

Activity: 5

Merit: 0

Quote from: onnz423 on February 03, 2018, 06:44:17 AM

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.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: ?? on ??

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 ... Wink

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.

Karartma1

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1422

Quote from: ?? on ??

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

I'm an eager supporters of youngsters entering the Bitcoin world. PM me if you wish

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

@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.

nc50lc

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 6080

Self-proclaimed Genius

Quote from: ?? on ??

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).

HCP

legendary

Activity: 2086

Merit: 4361

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! Tongue

#theFOMOisReal

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: ?? on ??

It is very encouraging that the fees are low, and they can be used to consolidate small entries, because when I first started my $ 5 on the stock exchange commission was 10 percent.

the withdrawal fees of exchanges have always been high and it has little to do with bitcoin transaction fees. after the fees went up they all increased their already high withdrawal fees and some of them decreased it recently but it is still pretty high. for example there are exchanges charging 0.0015BTC=$12-$13 for a withdrawal.

Kakmakr

legendary

Activity: 3542

Merit: 1965

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I think the main advantage for me is that I am more inclined to make more tx's to mixer services and grouping money together now that the fees are lower. When the miners fees are high, you are more hesitant to do some house cleaning, because you are confronted with the high miner fees and the extra fees that you have to pay the mixer service.

I can now sort money received from different sources at a fraction of the price, before I send it through the mixer service. This hides the end destination of those funds.

Great idea OP, it pushed me to do some house cleaning. Cheesy

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: Thirdspace on March 15, 2018, 06:58:12 PM

what is going on with the network tx fee?
I checked btc.com and it shows Shocked

100 Satoshis/vbyte | 0.001 BTC/KvB as Current best transaction fees

that may be a bug in btc.com fee estimation system because everywhere else is suggesting 10-20 satoshi/byte and if you check the memory pool yourself you can see less than 10 S/B is a good amount right now. check my previous comment here to see how i do it.

Quote

it sometimes suddenly jumped to 1k+ txs and drop back again to 400s txs

you mean number of unconfirmed transactions? that is normal! it usually is around 2000-4000 ones in the memory pool and when a block is found, it drops down.

Thirdspace

hero member

Activity: 1232

Merit: 738

Mixing reinvented for your privacy | chipmixer.com

what is going on with the network tx fee?
I checked btc.com and it shows Shocked

100 Satoshis/vbyte | 0.001 BTC/KvB as Current best transaction fees
it sometimes suddenly jumped to 1k+ txs and drop back again to 400s txs
is someone trying to drive the tx fee high like last december again?
with not so many transactions queued, tx fee could be set as low as 1s/B and still get confirmed in the next block

Code:

Unconfirmed Txs Count 438
Transaction Accelerator Size 153,625 - 153.63 KB
24h Tx Rate 2.45 txs/s
Median block size of past 2 weeks 1,055,604 Bytes
Current best transaction fees 0.001 BTC/kVB(virtual)

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: aplistir on March 01, 2018, 01:22:37 PM

No-one has said what is the minimum amount of inputs that would benefit from consolidating inputs?

Any number of inputs larger than 1 can be benefit.

Quote

Is it necessary to consolidate 2 inputs? How about 3 or 4?

It depends on how fees develop. Fees have been more than 0.001BTC per input. If you consolidate 3 inputs now, and you need to make a transaction if fees are that high again, you'll safe $10 or more per input you consolidate now.

Quote

How much savings would that make, if the fees go back to high levels?

Play around with the sliders on https://coinb.in/#fees , it tells you exactly how many bytes you can safe.

aplistir

full member

Activity: 378

Merit: 197

No-one has said what is the minimum amount of inputs that would benefit from consolidating inputs?

LoyceV mentioned that he consolidated 3 inputs.

Is it necessary to consolidate 2 inputs? How about 3 or 4?

How much savings would that make, if the fees go back to high levels?

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: LoyceV on February 26, 2018, 03:51:05 AM

Meanwhile, https://btc.com/stats/unconfirmed-tx recommends 1 Sat/Byte, and https://coinb.in/#fees goes as low as 0 (note: I don't recommend to send zero-fee transactions anymore; they might round 0.49 down to zero).

the problem with fees lower than 1 satoshi/byte is propagation. thanks to one of bitcoin core's recent updates (i think was 0.15) you can no longer set it lower than that because majority of the network will reject your transaction!
otherwise if you can get your transaction to the miners, most of them will mine it 0.684 sat/B

same with 0 (free) transactions. even when this PR was merged, there were miners still mining 0 fee transactions

Topic: [Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs! - page 59. (Read 88277 times)