rich1.0npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58https://nostr.ae/npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-07-10 📝 Original message:CPFP is interesting, but it does not fully cover the case it is trying to address: If TX_a goes out without sufficient fee, sending out a new TX_b will not help TX_a suddenly reach nodes/miners that ignored TX_a. On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Richard Moore <me at ricmoo.com> wrote: > Hey guys, > > With all the recent congestion and discussion regarding FSS-RBF, I was > wondering if there good reasons not to have CPFP as a default policy? Or is > it? > > I was also wondering, with CPFP, should the transaction fee be based on > total transactions size, or the sum of each transaction’s required fee? For > example, a third transaction C whose unconfirmed utxo from transaction B > has an unconfirmed utxo in transaction A (all of A’s inputs are confirmed), > with each A, B and C being ~300bytes, should C’s transaction fee be 0.0001 > btc for the ~1kb it is about to commit to the blockchain, or 0.0003 btc for > the 3 transactions it is going to commit. > > I tried to test it out a few days ago, sending 0.0008 btc without any fee, > then that utxo into another transaction w/ 0.0001 btc. It still hasn’t > confirmed, which could be any of: a) CPFP doesn’t have enough hash power, > b) the amounts are too small, c) the coins are too new, d) the fee should > have actually been 0.0002 btc, e) the congestion is just too great; or some > combination. > > Just curious as whatnot… > > Thanks, > RicMoo > > .·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º> > > Richard Moore ~ Founder > Genetic Mistakes Software inc. > phone: (778) 882-6125 > email: ricmoo at geneticmistakes.com > www: http://GeneticMistakes.com > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150710/5fb1e521/attachment.html>