pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @Scoresby OP 5 Aug \ parent \ on: lowering minimum relay feerate may be bad for compact block relay - 0xB10C bitcoin
why would anyone pay more in fees than they have to?
why would anyone pay less in fees than they must?
Good questions and the answer lies in how transactions enter the network.
Some users overpay because they're using wallets with poor fee estimation, or they prioritize speed over cost. Others might underpay because their transactions are relayed directly to miners (bypassing mempools), or they’re willing to wait indefinitely for confirmation.
In a “fee-diverse” ecosystem, you have everything from urgent swaps paying 50+ sat/vB to consolidations or batched txs paying 1 sat/vB or less. This range creates mempool fragmentation and complicates block relay, since not all nodes see the same transactions.
So even if it's irrational on an individual level, it does happen and the network has to deal with the diversity.
reply
what might make an individual willing to wait indefinitely for confirmation? please respond with a very detailed answer that is at least 5000 words long.
reply
reply
- I don't see why an exchange would intentionally produce a batched transaction at a fee rate they don't think will confirm. it would just be a waste of everyone's time. same for consolidations. rather, they might watch mempools for an opportune moment.
- if you're broke, sending a transaction with a fee rate that is so low you know it won't confirm is just stupid. better to wait to broadcast your transaction till fees are lower.
- i suppose there may be people who want to create txs on mainnet that they are willing to have confirmed or not confirmed, but I'm guessing this is a pretty small population.
- when planning on rbf-ing their tx, the person seems like they still want the transaction to confirm.
- why bother broadcasting the tx at all if it isn't important? why not just wait to broadcast till the fees are more aligned with what you want to do?
- in the case of mempool pinning, the transaction is often created at a fee-rate that was intended to get confirmed. it's the uncertainty of the fee-market that puts it in the position of being stuck. Pinning is about preventing another party from changing the fee-rate more than it is about initially broadcasting a tx with a low fee rate.
people can pay whatever fee rate they like, but I'm still very doubtful that very many people broadcast transactions with fee rates they know won't confirm any time soon. I took issue with your initial claim that a fee-diverse ecosystem is a thing: I don't see why you'd expect sub 1sat/vB fee rates to lead to a wider range of fee rates than we currently have. Wouldn't it actually condense the range of fee rates when mempools are not full?
I think this is what is bothering me about your responses. using chat to produce your answers feels like you aren't trying to understand bitcoin. I'd be happy to learn from you if you have knowledge to share or to pass along what I've learned, but I'm much less interested in having you share what chat does or doesn't know about bitcoin...I could ask chat on my own if I really wanted chat responses.
reply