Pages:
Author

Topic: I know this has been brought up before, but confirmation times are getting weird - page 5. (Read 10042 times)

legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
(I noticed for example, that Elgius is de-prioritizing transactions that reuse addresses, this is new, and perhaps that is a cause for this)

This will cause the transactions that reuse addresses to be delayed.  Is there a way to get a statistic on how many transactions fall into this category (reused therefore being delayed by some of the pools)?
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
Well threshold would imply some sort of cental block planning agency.   Various miners have various different block parameters.  Tx volume is higher than the block size being created by the various parameters currently used by various miners.   Some miners target larger blocks, some target smaller ones, a couple seem to include nothing but the coinbase tx.   Collectively all miners have a certain tx throughput which is less than the tx volume and the limit imposed by the 1MB cap.

Miners can either expand the # of tx they include in blocks
OR
Users can collectively reduce tx volume
OR
The backlog will grow

For the time being a way to put yourself at the front of the line is to pay a tx fee but that won't reduce/eliminate the backlog it will just ensure your tx has a higher chance of going first.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Guys... everything that everyone has said in this thread so far has ALWAYS BEEN TRUE (not paying transaction fees leads to long confirmation times, sure). None of that explains why the confirmation times are spiking NOW.

It is very simple.

Tx volume is higher than average block size.  It is THAT SIMPLE.

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 300 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 600 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?


If it is still too complicated lets try a non bitcoin metaphor.

If you have a pool (mem pool) and you are adding 2 gallons a minute to the pool (unconfirmed txs) and at the same time have the drain open and water is draining out of the pool at 1 gallon per minute (tx being placed into blocks) will the water in the pool rise or lower?  What is required to prevent the water level in the pool from rising?

I feel like we are talking past each other...

Are you saying that you think the tx volume has suddenly crossed a threshold ~4 days ago? I am not asking about why confirmation times go up and down in general, but why they have gone up a lot very recently.

(I noticed for example, that Elgius is de-prioritizing transactions that reuse addresses, this is new, and perhaps that is a cause for this)
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
Guys... everything that everyone has said in this thread so far has ALWAYS BEEN TRUE (not paying transaction fees leads to long confirmation times, sure). None of that explains why the confirmation times are spiking NOW.

It is very simple.

Tx volume is higher than average block size.  It is THAT SIMPLE.

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 300 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?

If users are creating an average of 400 tx every 600 seconds and miners are making blocks with an average of 600 tx every 600 seconds what is going to happen to the tx backlog?


If it is still too complicated lets try a non bitcoin metaphor.

If you have a pool (mem pool) and you are adding 2 gallons a minute to the pool (unconfirmed txs) and at the same time have the drain open and water is draining out of the pool at 1 gallon per minute (tx being placed into blocks) will the water in the pool rise or lower?  What is required to prevent the water level in the pool from rising?
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
That's it, right here.  The block only permits a limited amount of zero fee transactions to be included, and any additional transactions must meet the criteria for the fee schedule to be included into a block. 

That is not correct.   A miner could make every block 1MB ~2,400 tx only include the free ones and exclude every paying tx if they wanted.  Not saying they would (it would be stupid) or they should but they could.  Saying the "block" prevents them is a cop out.

Miners decide what tx to include in a block.  The only thing which can't be included in a block is an invalid tx, or a sum of tx greater than 1MB in size.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Guys... everything that everyone has said in this thread so far has ALWAYS BEEN TRUE (not paying transaction fees leads to long confirmation times, sure). None of that explains why the confirmation times are spiking NOW.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1000
Anyone knows if Eligius is still doing zero-fee transactions?
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1010

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block


Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem

That's it, right here.  The block only permits a limited amount of zero fee transactions to be included, and any additional transactions must meet the criteria for the fee schedule to be included into a block.  Basicly, too many people are choosing cost of transaction over time to confirmation.  This is to be expected as the number of transactions increase, as this sets up a market for the fees (higher fees are more likely to be favored into the next block) while still providing for a free (or out of band transaction fee) methodology.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
I'm slightly annoyed cause sometimes it's fast and sometimes slow
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111
what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

A large block would increase the odds of being orphaned, so they don't really have incentive to include zero-fee or low-fee transactions.
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1004
Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!
what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

Probably because far too many of those transactions are being sent with low (or no) transaction fees, and the miners just don't feel like turning charity into an entitlement.

I'd like to know the stats as far as the trends in fees go. But if that is the case, I can't say I blame the miners for not wanting to encourage the practice.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?

Right. This is the question. Also, it's mysterious that this started happening just a few days ago.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.

why are miners creating a back log when they have plenty of space.

why not include all the TX's if there is space for them?
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block


@D&T: I read your first post about this. What I don't understand is... what changed? Why is this happening now?
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

Essentially all.   None of the last 100 blocks were larger than 400KB.  Only 5 were larger than 300KB.   The vast majority are 100KB to 250KB.  More than 20 are <100KB.   The block size limit is 1MB.
member
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
SudoSuRootDev... AKA... AllBiznessMan
Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block

Yes it is up to the miners. Anyone can set bitcoind to only accept transactions with 0.0005 BTC transaction fees if they wanted, and if their hash rate is high enough to solve a block reward than that is what will go. Like the add on which was debated quite a while back, to avoid all satoshidice addresses. It is up to the miners. If you have the hash rate, you have the control of who goes and who waits.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
Confirmation time =/= block time.

Average time between blocks is <10 minutes.  I pointed this out in the prior thread but it will likely get ingored again.  Any "answer" which involves miners solving less blocks would mean the time between blocks would be greater than 10 minutes and that is not the case.

Miners are on average producing a block size of ~160KB.
http://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

To clear the backlog and reduce the average wait time to ~1 block would require blocks to be roughly 50% larger.  Miners are chosing not to do that.  The average block has ~300 tx vs the ~2,500 tx limit imposed by the 1MB or ~600 tx it would take to clea the backlog

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block


what blocks are 90% empty and there is a back log?

am i missing somthing?
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block


Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem

Well the UXTO currently contains paying tx waiting longer than a block although I have been paying the min fee on every tx (even those which don't require it) for two years now so you are preaching to the choir.
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1111

Simple version: blocks are 90% empty, tx wait longer to be included in a block


Pay 0.0001XBT fee, or 0.04USD, will solve the problem
member
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
SudoSuRootDev... AKA... AllBiznessMan
Another thing which I noticed today, which may or may not be related, is that while making a few satoshidice bets, one bet would show 22:40 and then my bet would come in and showed 21:41, and another right after it showed 23:42. It was quite odd I thought and also it caused one or 2 of my bets to take forever to be returned. While other peoples bets were being returned after one confirmation, my bet which was an hour or 2 before (only according to the time shown) had to wait for about 6 to 8 confirmations before it paid out. This was sent through my blockchain wallet. I do have the privkeys in bitcoind also but I am tethered to my laptop so it'll take forever to download and slow me down browsing, since I haven't been caught up with the blockchain in quite a while.
Pages:
Jump to: