Topic: Size for single Lightning Invoice? (Read 116 times)
In regards to transfer capacity, having multiple smaller channels or a single larger channel can impact overall transfer fees. Multiple smaller channels may allow for greater flexibility in routing payments and handling transactions, but may require more management effort. On the other hand, a single larger channel might simplify management, but might be less flexible in terms of splitting payments.
Hi,
so if I want to minimize fees on a relative basis with the Boltz Exchange, a swap of 0.1 would be ideal vs multiple smaller swaps due to the high miner fees they charge. How difficult is it to achieve (with CLN)? Are there particular settings that could help? For transfer capacity in practice, is it better to have multiple smaller channels if their total size is the same vs a single channel? When I did some tests recently, invoices above 0.0256 seemed to be problematic.
Thanks!
so if I want to minimize fees on a relative basis with the Boltz Exchange, a swap of 0.1 would be ideal vs multiple smaller swaps due to the high miner fees they charge. How difficult is it to achieve (with CLN)? Are there particular settings that could help? For transfer capacity in practice, is it better to have multiple smaller channels if their total size is the same vs a single channel? When I did some tests recently, invoices above 0.0256 seemed to be problematic.
Thanks!
Jump to: