1
I have created a transaction with high miner's fee and it is now in mempool (in testnet):
However, it doesn't seem to be confirming. It's already missed two opportunities to confirm. Transactions with much lower miner's fees are going through instead.
Is Bitcoin this random or am I missing something?
1
Decoding your transaction shows an output:
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.00000000,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_RETURN 68656c6c6f5f776f726c64",
"hex": "6a0b68656c6c6f5f776f726c64",
"type": "nulldata"
}
}, ...
This might be the reason the miners won't touch it as it may be flagged as non-standard on older nodes. Notice the warning on blockcypher:
Maybe someone can comment on exactly why, as these null_data transactions were made standard on Bitcoin-core 0.9.0, see https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#null-data
I wondered about this possibility, but I thought the "standard" checks were disabled on testnet. Also, what with the segwit soft fork, I don't think there could possibly be any miners running 0.9.0 or earlier. – Nate Eldredge – 2018-08-31T04:25:55.053
Yeah that's what I was thinking as well, it's curious. blockcypher states it is in 71 mempools at the moment, seems low to me. – JBaczuk – 2018-08-31T04:31:44.673
0
I'm also having problems with testnet which I have not seen before. I'm thinking I may have changed something in my scripts but cannot see what it could be. I'm using multi-sigs for most of the destination addresses
https://tchain.btc.com/2N16FGLa4YpTnCuby9xZT2T2q3rkAxfcX6Y https://tchain.btc.com/5cd81ee81ca48500edb78956aefa6f9f06074a7a7a234579313e5e40cb01b022
Another possible cause is that your transaction has an output which is dust, as do several of its ancestors (which are also still unconfirmed). But I am not sure whether the dust rule is enforced by testnet nodes by default.
– Nate Eldredge – 2018-08-31T04:50:00.620It's confirmed now. – Nate Eldredge – 2018-08-31T13:41:45.797