0
Supposing I am having 100 BTC in a single Bitcoin address and I send 1BTC to each individual ( total 100 individuals) and I have instantiated all of these transactions in one go( assuming that they will be running parallely). Also, assuming that it takes 10 minutes to validate a transaction, How much time will it take for the 100th transaction to be validated? Will the time depends on the previous unconfirmed transactions? ( Consider that there is no double spending here)
1
Assuming that by "validate" you mean "confirm" then a chain of 100 transactions sent from the same wallet should, theoretically, all confirm in the next block or two - assuming that each transaction's included fee is sufficient.
However, the outcome described above is only theoretical, because many clients place a relay limit on unconfirmed transactions in a single chain. The Core client, for example, does not accept more than 24 unconfirmed transactions from a single chain into its mempool.
In the case of your example chain of 100 transactions there could, therefore, be a best-outcome delay of at least 5 blocks before all the transactions are confirmed.
Further to your question, it is not a case that the 100th transaction is dependent on the 1st or the 99th transaction to have to confirm first. If each of the simultaneous 100 transactions being sent from a wallet is valid and has sufficient fees, then they will each be mined as individual valid transactions by miners, regardless of their wallet of origin. If a miner happens to be running the Core client, then there will be a batch limit of 24 transactions (from the single chain) that can be mined per block.
As pointed out in the comments, a transaction can have more than one output, so your example's 100 recipients can each be sent bitcoin via a single transaction.
Thanks a lot for your answer. Your answer puts me in another doubt. Assuming I am including proper fees and Supposing that there were 101 people instead to whom I am giving 1BTC each (now I am double spending). Now, thinking of the case that all those are processed parallely, how will the double spending be taken care of? – The Coder – 2017-06-24T12:06:51.980
Ha! Good thinking. Logical next step. As it happens there was a question a few days ago about how simultaneous double spend txns play out in the network: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/54734/38546
This answer is incomplete in two regards: 1) Many nodes do not relay long chains of unconfirmed transactions beyond a certain depth. E.g. Bitcoin Core doesn't accept more than 24 unconfirmed transactions in one chain to its mempool. 2) the answer should point out that a transaction can have more than one output, and thus all 100 recipients could be credited in a single transaction. ;) – Murch – 2017-06-26T01:17:51.823
What do you mean by "10 minutes to validate a transaction"? Transaction validating time is microseconds – amaclin – 2017-06-24T08:11:04.683
Validation means confirming that the transaction is valid and is not a double spend. – The Coder – 2017-06-24T08:18:23.077
When a transaction is confirmed a block is added to the Bitcoin block chain which takes about 10 minutes. Correct me if I am wrong. – The Coder – 2017-06-24T08:19:03.220
You know absolutely nothing about hou Bitcoin network works. Start with reading basic manuals before asking stupid questions – amaclin – 2017-06-24T08:25:47.257
Well, I am questioning here because I am not sure about this and I am not able to find about it. And if you are so clear than you should provide an answer. – The Coder – 2017-06-24T08:44:11.313
I've downvoted this question, because when I tried to edit it, I couldn't figure out how to save it without completely rewriting it. It is sloppily written, incorrectly tagged, has an unsubstantial title, misuses terminology, and is based on incorrect assumptions. What are you trying to achieve? Why don't you simply send to all 100 recipients in a single transaction? Are you aware that blocks collect many transactions? Please read e.g. https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/146/5406, https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/12427/5406, https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/43785/5406
– Murch – 2017-06-26T01:21:35.327