全 25 件のコメント

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 3ポイント4ポイント  (6子コメント)

Where is the transaction?

[–]k0vic 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Will OP deliver?

[–]joeysupra[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

[–]platypii 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

180 bits per kB. There's ya problem mate.

http://bitcoinexchangerate.org/fees

You're sitting behind ~20MB of transactions that pay more than you.

If you paid 145 bits more (4 US cents), you'd be in the top 750kB of the mempool and would likely make it into the next 1 or 2 blocks.

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

It made it into roughly the next block after your comment without paying anything more. :)

[–]platypii 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It already had 5 confirmations when I made my comment, but the point still stands, just pay 4 cents more and you won't have that problem.

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Included in block 364332, 130 minutes after it first hit the network. (When you responded it was in eligius' mempool, so I figured it would be in the next couple blocks and held off responding.)

[–]Goodtimery 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Stress Test is still in full force.

Edit: If you don't believe me, see for yourself: tx/s

[–]ujka -1ポイント0ポイント  (14子コメント)

Regular fee puts your tx in a pool of 44k unconfirmed transactions. B/c of Stress Test.

[–]bitofsense 2ポイント3ポイント  (12子コメント)

/u/nullc weren't you saying this had practically no effect?

"If you weren't on reddit you wouldn't even know there was a problem" was basically what Bitcoin developers are saying, and yet there are dozens of people here complaining about confirmation times and undoubtedly hundreds more in the real world with the same complaints. The block size should have been raised yesterday

[–]platypii 0ポイント1ポイント  (10子コメント)

The solution isn't a block size increase, it's fixing wallets to set appropriate fees.

[–]Raystonn 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

Right, we should let people who spam the network decide how much we should pay in fees.

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

No amount of blocksize lets you avoid having to pay ahead of someone while a while loop. :)

[–]Raystonn 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

If all the transactions fit into a single block, your statement is not accurate.

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Someone with a while loop running on a botnet can overcome the network connection of any particular miner.

[–]Raystonn -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

If the network connection is overcome, some of the transactions will not be transmitted and thus not propagate. These dropped transactions need not fit into any block at all.

If all transactions do transmit, they can be included in a block if there is no maximum block size limitation or maximum message size.

[–]platypii 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Making the block size large enough so that no amount of spam can fill it is a poor solution as it just puts the burden on every single node to store and process all that spam. It's like saying that we should solve the email spam problem by making our inbox capacity bigger instead of applying a spam filter.

And, there are still no technical reasons why a spammer can't fill 20MB blocks, leaving us back in the same situation.

The bitcoin network can and should drop transactions that don't pay a high enough fee. At the moment, we're talking a few cents to outbid spam. The problem is that the wallets don't let the users choose to pay a few cents to avoid the delays.

[–]bitofsense -3ポイント-2ポイント  (3子コメント)

just fyi there's another thread about someone waiting 25 hours for a single confirmation. I can hardly believe you're a "bitcoin expert" but naive enough to claim this is having no effect

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I like how you intensify your claim about what I said every time you repeat it, "no big deal" -> "practically no effect" -> "no effect".

In this case, the transaction confirmed in 2 hours. Where is this 25 hour one?

[–]bitofsense 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

[–]nullcGreg Maxwell - Bitcoin Expert 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Confirmed now. I suspect he had an issue where he shut down before it got broadcast out of his client effectively, but it's hard to be sure.

[–]gyftuser -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just hope there is no propagation errors just had it happen to me again about hour ago.