It's a spam attack. My mempool just hit 80k transactions but the smart fee hasn't increased at all. Fee-paying transactions are completely unaffected, and the spam transactions will never confirm, regardless of block size. Anyone dragging the block size debate squabble into it doesn't know what they're talking about.
If this is a spam attack then an increased blocksize would make it less effective. Miners would be able to clear the mempool faster, making the spammers pay fees until they have enough of wasting their money. 
Topic: Mempool is now up to 25.5 MB with 22,200 transactions waiting. - page 11. (Read 7841 times)
February 29, 2016, 11:21:14 AM
February 29, 2016, 11:20:40 AM
1mb can not last forever everyone know this, it is time tp upgrade, and bring some room to the block limit, it will be done in june this year so no worry about it
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
Only now are we truly reaching capacity. Four months is to long, it will be to late by that time with a change that does to little. I presume you are talking about SegWit to be released in June, since Core is unlikely to ever increase the blocksize, considering that they where even unable to promise and guarantee a blocksize increase by 2017/2018 in the recent satoshi round table meetings, which is why F2Pool dropped its support.i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
Core wants to fundamentally change the economic policy of Bitcoin, diverging from the original design and plan from Satoshi, this should be clear to everyone by now. We are now approaching the economic change event that Jeff Garzick warned us about.
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/011973.html
i'm not sure but i've read somewhere, that the core team want to increase the capacity besides the segwit thing, they first will do the segwit upgrade then they will increase the capacity to 2mb, with an effective 4mb as a new limit or slightly below it
1mb can not last forever everyone know this, it is time tp upgrade, and bring some room to the block limit, it will be done in june this year so no worry about it
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
june?
i thought core was still on the mindset of ptting in code in july with a 12 month grace period. meaning people have to wait 16 months in total
so have they agreed to put it in aprils release (im guessing by your statement) with a 2 month grace period(again guessing by your statement)?
ah yeah july, i mistaken it
February 29, 2016, 11:19:42 AM
Now
11426
18.63 MB
Another stress test?
11426
18.63 MB
Another stress test?
February 29, 2016, 11:17:20 AM
It's a spam attack. My mempool just hit 80k transactions but the smart fee hasn't increased at all. Fee-paying transactions are completely unaffected, and the spam transactions will never confirm, regardless of block size. Anyone dragging the block size debate squabble into it doesn't know what they're talking about.
February 29, 2016, 11:13:29 AM
Never had to wait 3 days for a transaction... that's insane. If you are waiting 3 days for a transaction you are paying a shitty or just no fee, so that's you deserve if you want to go the super cheap way. If you want to be just cheap and not super cheap, pay the default fee and the transaction will be confirmed in a matter of minutes.
Paying a bigger fee doesn't magically increase block space.Quote from: Jeff Garzick
Further, wallet software User experience is very, very poor in a hyper-competitive fee market.
February 29, 2016, 11:11:27 AM
I see just 9286 tx and 15.05 MB
Maybe you're looking in the wrong place then. 
February 29, 2016, 11:11:20 AM
and today some big fish are moving founds
https://blockchain.info/it/tx/20c4dc302b27e27d712f4f2786944cfd81ef6b1ec0ed67b555ea237cb4b4ff49
https://blockchain.info/it/tx/20c4dc302b27e27d712f4f2786944cfd81ef6b1ec0ed67b555ea237cb4b4ff49
February 29, 2016, 11:09:31 AM
1mb can not last forever everyone know this, it is time tp upgrade, and bring some room to the block limit, it will be done in june this year so no worry about it
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
june?
i thought core was still on the mindset of ptting in code in july with a 12 month grace period. meaning people have to wait 16 months in total
so have they agreed to put it in aprils release (im guessing by your statement) with a 2 month grace period(again guessing by your statement)?
February 29, 2016, 11:08:08 AM
25.5 MB?
I see just 9286 tx and 15.05 MB
slightly above normal but nothing out of ordinary
EDIT: it's monday, one of the busier days, a little bit of commerce activity is nothing unusual
I see just 9286 tx and 15.05 MB
slightly above normal but nothing out of ordinary
EDIT: it's monday, one of the busier days, a little bit of commerce activity is nothing unusual
February 29, 2016, 11:07:38 AM
1mb can not last forever everyone know this, it is time tp upgrade, and bring some room to the block limit, it will be done in june this year so no worry about it
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
Only now are we truly reaching capacity. Four months is to long, it will be to late by that time with a change that does to little. I presume you are talking about SegWit to be released in June, since Core is unlikely to ever increase the blocksize, considering that they where even unable to promise and guarantee a blocksize increase by 2017/2018 in the recent satoshi round table meetings, which is why F2Pool dropped its support.i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
Core wants to fundamentally change the economic policy of Bitcoin, diverging from the original design and plan from Satoshi, this should be clear to everyone by now. We are now approaching the economic change event that Jeff Garzick warned us about.
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/011973.html
February 29, 2016, 11:04:55 AM
Never had to wait 3 days for a transaction... that's insane. If you are waiting 3 days for a transaction you are paying a shitty or just no fee, so that's you deserve if you want to go the super cheap way. If you want to be just cheap and not super cheap, pay the default fee and the transaction will be confirmed in a matter of minutes.
Paying a bigger fee doesn't magically increase block space.
February 29, 2016, 11:00:49 AM
Never had to wait 3 days for a transaction... that's insane. If you are waiting 3 days for a transaction you are paying a shitty or just no fee, so that's you deserve if you want to go the super cheap way. If you want to be just cheap and not super cheap, pay the default fee and the transaction will be confirmed in a matter of minutes.
February 29, 2016, 10:58:06 AM
I am sad to see this. Bitcoin is not meant to operate in such an overloaded state. That was never part of the original design or plan. The blocksize limit should be above the average transaction volume. You have your head in the sand if you think that making Bitcoin less reliable and more expensive is a good thing. It most certainly is not, we do not even have layer two solutions right now, which is why new users will most likely adopt fiat and altcoin solutions instead. If the blocksize is not increased I expect to see Bitcoin out competed and obsolesced.
February 29, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
1mb can not last forever everyone know this, it is time to upgrade, and bring some room to the block limit, it will be done in june this year so no worry about it
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
i think poeple can wait 4 months, because they waited years for this fix so...
February 29, 2016, 10:54:30 AM
If Classic were to be implemented now, would this still happen so frequently?
If this is "natural" then yes. 2 MB would able to hold ground for a month or two maybe (in addition there is zero guarantee that miners would instantly let blocks get filled up to 2 MB ). However, take a look at Bitcoinfees; it shows that most of the transactions included a fee that is much lower than the recommended one. This is odd. February 29, 2016, 10:52:25 AM
Any particular reason for the high mempool? Any stress test on going?
If Classic were to be implemented now, would this still happen so frequently?
If Classic were to be implemented now, would this still happen so frequently?
February 29, 2016, 10:49:54 AM
That's what https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions shows over here right now.
You're late. I've verified it once more and it looked like that, however on my 3rd verification it seemed like it was back to normal. I'm guessing some bug (updated post). February 29, 2016, 10:47:54 AM
The mempool was nearly empty at around 1-1.5 two days ago. Nothing surprising here and certainly no need to panic. This is very interesting though (according to Blockchain.info):
Quote
Total Fees 2,279.00943982 BTC
That's almost $1M in fees in 25 blocks worth of transactions. Quote
Total Fees 3.87280194 BTC
That's what https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions shows over here right now. February 29, 2016, 10:44:03 AM
The mempool was nearly empty at around 1-1.5k two days ago. Nothing surprising here and certainly no need to panic. It looked like there was a bug on blockchain.info and the number of fees was much higher than it actually is.
Update: Removed some (false) information.
No, we need block size increase 2 months ago...
Not really.Update: Removed some (false) information.
February 29, 2016, 10:43:26 AM
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/
Need a blocksize increase now. But we're all retarded. People will stop using BTC when it takes 3 days for their tx's to confirm
Need a blocksize increase now. But we're all retarded. People will stop using BTC when it takes 3 days for their tx's to confirm
No, we need block size increase 2 months ago...
Jump to: