Pages:
Author

Topic: BitcoinQueue.com ⏳ ★ Real-time Queue Charts 📈 (Read 2387 times)

legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
Sorry about letting you down for so long, the site is coming back to life soon!

I am running a dedicated full node for collection purposes now, so more reliability is to be expected.

Thanks for your interest, stay tuned...
sr. member
Activity: 1722
Merit: 261
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions   Grin

I think it looks good and see the many queues transaction for immediate confirmed
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
At the moment, if you need quick settlement you'd better triple the usual fee.

You should go at least >100 satoshi / byte if you want to make it a matter of hours.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
Damn that doesn't look good especially for businesses Sad
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
The queue has returned, and it's uglier than before! It's been hovering over 60k almost for the last 2 days

https://www.bitcoinqueue.com/details/



https://www.bitcoinqueue.com/details/
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
We currently see the highest peak on the graph since the site started several months ago!



https://www.bitcoinqueue.com/
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
Bitcoinqueue's total transactions do seem to tally with Blockchain.info
Therefore, Blockchain.info mempool does not tally with Bitcoinfees.21 mempool either.
I had suspected Blockchain.info did not count zero fee transactions, but as Bitcoinqueue (taking from Blockchain.info) does have "some" zero fee, that does not seem to be the case.

Can you explain this difference?
(do you consider Bitcoinqueue "accurate" for seeing "the mempool", will it be "more accurate" if you tap directly into the network?)
Can fees be accurately calculated if "the mempool" is a nonspecific thing, different to each site?
(Blockchain.info are not publicly predicting fees of course, but do show "total" unconfirmed. Seems quite meaningless without scope)

Sorry that I missed your last post until now. Yes, I can confirm that BitcoinQueue.com is using blockchain.info transaction feed until now, partly because running a full Bitcoin node on my VPS would be costly, and also because among all centralized sources I could choose from, it seems the most sensible and reliable to pick.

It could change in the future, the idea would be to merge several sources into the incoming feed.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
Again we can see unconfirmed transaction build-ups occurring on a regular basis. Not much has changed in the transaction fee landscape for the last three months, which is partly why no significant update was done until now.



I am now resuming development of BitcoinQueue.com to include a very useful feature in my opinion, which is individual unconfirmed transaction lookup and statistics. That means you can fill in the transaction ID, and see where your transaction sits in the queue, the probability that it will be included in the next blocks, and other useful statistics.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1001
it means that it will only be since Wednesday that we will be able to compare bitcoinqueue.com data with bitcoinfees.21 and it will then be interesting if the gap has closed by then as it should be the cast.

PS: our data now seems to be coherent with blockchain.info, which is temporarily used as feed source.

The gap with bitcoinfees.21 does not seem to be closing.
Every price bracket is different?
(i.e. 21-30 sat, 2650 tx pending Bitcoinqueue.com but only about 200 tx pending on Bitcoinfees.21)

Bitcoinqueue's total transactions do seem to tally with Blockchain.info
Therefore, Blockchain.info mempool does not tally with Bitcoinfees.21 mempool either.
I had suspected Blockchain.info did not count zero fee transactions, but as Bitcoinqueue (taking from Blockchain.info) does have "some" zero fee, that does not seem to be the case.

Can you explain this difference?
(do you consider Bitcoinqueue "accurate" for seeing "the mempool", will it be "more accurate" if you tap directly into the network?)
Can fees be accurately calculated if "the mempool" is a nonspecific thing, different to each site?
(Blockchain.info are not publicly predicting fees of course, but do show "total" unconfirmed. Seems quite meaningless without scope)

Sorry if I'm struggling to express my issue simply and clearly.  Smiley


legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
[UPDATE]

10 donators already, thank you very much Cheesy

Many new features will be added before next week, including the following:

  • Block information with evolution of stats with each block (requested feature)
  • More details and statistical analysis of the mempool/unconfirmed queue
  • Live overview with totals and average wait time

Stay tuned!
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
[UPDATE]

Now live table data is coming up, get a sneak peak here Wink

http://www.bitcoinqueue.com/live.html
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
Why are there only about 800 transactions under <10 sat on your chart, and about 3700 transactions in total.
On bitcoin.info there are about 4100 transactions in total,
and on bitcoinfees.21 there are about 3500 transactions >10 sat, and 43000 10 sat and under?

First, we need to agree that 72h is the comparison metric. This was only recently changed on bitcoinqueue.com (it was initially 4h, then 8h), i.e. on Friday afternoon (UTC). Then during the week-end, we lost almost 24h of data because the tx feed had died.

The reason of the failure is the following: My tx feed is using a websocket client that seems to keep the entire stream in memory until the websocket is disconnected. That caused the process to use always more RAM, first filling the swap and then killed by the kernel to preserve the system. Unfortunately, although all exceptions were caught within the program, there was nothing at that moment to restart the process.

The collection process is now protected by a shell (literally) to restart the process automatically, and I will update the process itself to stop after a 100,000 tx or so to work around the memory "leak" (stream as buffer, not clearing up). It will be easier than modifying the websocket client libraries, which is an external package (not my work).

So, the process was restarted this morning around 9.30am (UTC). If you add 72 hours to this, it means that it will only be since Wednesday that we will be able to compare bitcoinqueue.com data with bitcoinfees.21 and it will then be interesting if the gap has closed by then as it should be the cast.

Eventually, the tx data will be fed from my own internal source, but I have to work on this first: either run a full Bitcoin Core instance to feed the unconfirmed transactions, or tap directly into the network, but I have to make sure that tx are decoded the same was as Bitcoin Core would

The donations and continued interest over the project gives me more enthusiasm to develop the project further, of course Smiley

PS: our data now seems to be coherent with blockchain.info, which is temporarily used as feed source.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1001
Hey Matt, me again!

Cool, I am only motivated by actually wanting to see this work.
I don't want to jump in too soon, but I have another question.

Why are there only about 800 transactions under <10 sat on your chart, and about 3700 transactions in total.
On bitcoin.info there are about 4100 transactions in total,
and on bitcoinfees.21 there are about 3500 transactions >10 sat, and 43000 10 sat and under?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
I thought something was wrong. Keep working, you'll get there!
Looking better again now, with a quick glance. (it was flat lining, not now)

I'll clear off if i'm annoying you now?  Cheesy

You're not annoying me at all, your feedback is very much appreciated, thanks!

Of course, I'm still in the beta / experimental phase, but as you said, I'm getting there.

A huge and nasty bug has just been busted in the detail view, i.e. the >100 fee class wasn't summed up correctly (it was giving the average for all classes above 100 instead of summing them into one "more than" class).

Now the simple view and detailed view are reconciled. Phew Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1001
The collection process (tx feed) was killed by the kernel over last night Sad

I will be adding monitoring soon, stats have started rebuilding around 9am UTC this Sunday.

The sampling method, used for intervals 8h and higher, has been changed for the detailed view, and will be used for the simple view soon.

Stay tuned!

I thought something was wrong. Keep working, you'll get there!
Looking better again now, with a quick glance. (it was flat lining, not now)

I'll clear off if i'm annoying you now?  Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
The collection process (tx feed) was killed by the kernel over last night Sad

I will be adding monitoring soon, stats have started rebuilding around 9am UTC this Sunday.

The sampling method, used for intervals 8h and higher, has been changed for the detailed view, and will be used for the simple view soon.

Stay tuned!
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1001

I That live? I don't see it, just the old version.

http://www.bitcoinqueue.com/details/

Am I missing something (or are you)? Smiley

Ah, /details/..  I was missing something!



legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1018
Good job. this will surely be a good info source after halving.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035

I That live? I don't see it, just the old version.

http://www.bitcoinqueue.com/details/

Am I missing something (or are you)? Smiley
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1001

I That live? I don't see it, just the old version.
Pages:
Jump to: