Topic: Is the network really congested? - page 2. (Read 1017 times)
It has all worked for me if you use the required fee. Once we have lightning network all of this will be at thing of the past and we will look at how insane it was to send on-chain transactions for ridiculously small amounts of Bitcoin, it will be seen as some archaic thing.
I never had any probs with my transactions the last few weeks or months.Pay the minimum and you are fine.
So the network is not congested now.But this can and will change in the future.
But we are on the right path with yesterday's agreement of the Bitcoin Roundtable.
And what Classic is doing and saying I don't give a sh** to be honest.
So the network is not congested now.But this can and will change in the future.
But we are on the right path with yesterday's agreement of the Bitcoin Roundtable.
And what Classic is doing and saying I don't give a sh** to be honest.
The problem is not that it is currenlty congested, but that it will be congested in the very near future..!
Just because there is not a problem now, does not mean there will not be a problem in the future. It is better to solve something when you a problem on the horizon forming, than to wait for the problem to reach you and have to build a solution on short notice out of panic.
The people that report long wait times are likely not using correct fees, personally I have never had to wait longer than 1 block to get included on any transaction I recently made. Paying the normal 10k fee on a normal sized transaction.
Just because there is not a problem now, does not mean there will not be a problem in the future. It is better to solve something when you a problem on the horizon forming, than to wait for the problem to reach you and have to build a solution on short notice out of panic.
The people that report long wait times are likely not using correct fees, personally I have never had to wait longer than 1 block to get included on any transaction I recently made. Paying the normal 10k fee on a normal sized transaction.
hopefully the block halving will reduce the number of empty blocks, as it increases the incentive to include transactions that have a fee.
I don't think that the network is congested. There seems to be a problem with block density as selfish miners ignore transaction fees. This may become worse if they increase the blocksize. The real problem seems to result from various people trying to gain control of Bitcoin imho.
One of the biggest problems I had with the Classic fork was the constant propaganda that the network was congested and needed bigger blocks yesterday.
I never experienced that personally.
Here's an example of a transaction I did with Namecheap via Bitpay today :
https://blockchain.info/tx/9fdfb5e51536a5b3e06347cb5b70ce78b080db77a6e94406ebb6033f5c27baf3
With the browser open in one window and Bitcoin-core open in another, clicked send and within seconds Bitpay had already seen it. Within 10 minutes it was already in a block.
That's my general experience whether I am sending from Coinbase or Bitcoin-Core.
How big was the transaction fee? about a penny USD.
People report really long waits for confirmation but I just do not see it.
Clearly some people are having a problem or they would not be reporting these issues, but the problem I don't believe has anything to do with block size and thus would not be corrected by a hard fork that increases block size.
My guess is that either the transactions have incredibly small transaction fees, or the clients they are using are not connected to nodes that are well connected. In either case, increasing block size would do nothing to solve the problem.
That's why classic never appealed to me. The problem people wanted it to solve was not a problem it would solve.
SegWit on the other hand does solve actual problems *and* increases the transaction capacity.
I'm not opposed to the idea of increasing block size, but I am opposed to hard forks when they are not needed.
I never experienced that personally.
Here's an example of a transaction I did with Namecheap via Bitpay today :
https://blockchain.info/tx/9fdfb5e51536a5b3e06347cb5b70ce78b080db77a6e94406ebb6033f5c27baf3
With the browser open in one window and Bitcoin-core open in another, clicked send and within seconds Bitpay had already seen it. Within 10 minutes it was already in a block.
That's my general experience whether I am sending from Coinbase or Bitcoin-Core.
How big was the transaction fee? about a penny USD.
People report really long waits for confirmation but I just do not see it.
Clearly some people are having a problem or they would not be reporting these issues, but the problem I don't believe has anything to do with block size and thus would not be corrected by a hard fork that increases block size.
My guess is that either the transactions have incredibly small transaction fees, or the clients they are using are not connected to nodes that are well connected. In either case, increasing block size would do nothing to solve the problem.
That's why classic never appealed to me. The problem people wanted it to solve was not a problem it would solve.
SegWit on the other hand does solve actual problems *and* increases the transaction capacity.
I'm not opposed to the idea of increasing block size, but I am opposed to hard forks when they are not needed.
Jump to: