<blockquote>
  <p>A search for definitive information turned up literally nothing, so, what happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded for an extended period?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The same thing as always happens: miners decide, at their own discretion, which transactions to include in their blocks.  Most likely they will choose those that have the highest fees.  Transactions that don't go in the blocks remain unconfirmed.  There is no special handling for such a case.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>After a period of two weeks (default) transactions are dropped from mempool, if this continues for three months then all transactions from weeks one through eleven will need to be resubmitted a) when the load on mempool dies down a bit or b) with higher fees excluding some other transaction in its place.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>That's correct.  If the user still cares about having the transaction confirmed, they (or their software or their wallet provider) will need to do one of those two things.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I have seen mempool with over 50,000 transactions for many days in a row, perhaps weeks, so, should this actually be called a quasi-payment system where it is possible any given transaction may eventually be forgotten about if the user does not keep on top of it?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It's true that Bitcoin does not provide any guarantee that a given transaction will ever be confirmed, and it never did.  That simply isn't a design feature.  Feel free to call it a "quasi-payment system" if you like that term better.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-14T07:06:24.473Z
Thank you for your answer and expert opinion. Quasi-payment system is not intended to be a derogatory phrase, merely an observation of the operation.
Willtech
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-10T17:06:18.720Z
2019-03-10T17:06:18.720Z
Nate Eldredge
<p>A search for definitive information turned up literally nothing, so, what happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded for an extended period?</p>

<p>After a period of two weeks (default) transactions are dropped from mempool, if this continues for three months then all transactions from weeks one through eleven will need to be resubmitted a) when the load on mempool dies down a bit or b) with higher fees excluding some other transaction in its place.</p>

<p>I have seen mempool with over 50,000 transactions for many days in a row, perhaps weeks, so, should this actually be called a quasi-payment system where it is possible any given transaction may eventually be forgotten about if the user does not keep on top of it?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-10T15:26:18.580Z
Shouldn't the user who signs the transaction look at the required fees at a given point in time so that his transaction proceeds smoothly? If I just use 546 Satoshi as fees, my transaction is most likely not getting confirmed for a long time.
Ugam Kamat
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-14T07:08:29.870Z
@BlockGuru It is true, of course as you suggest. I usually choose three-day confirmation using the software, however, sometimes the transaction does not confirm for many weeks due to fluctuations in the mempool and the discretion of the miners.
Willtech
<transactions><unconfirmed-transactions><mempool><bandwidth>
What happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded?
Willtech
# What happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-03-10)

A search for definitive information turned up literally nothing, so, what happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded for an extended period?

After a period of two weeks (default) transactions are dropped from mempool, if this continues for three months then all transactions from weeks one through eleven will need to be resubmitted a) when the load on mempool dies down a bit or b) with higher fees excluding some other transaction in its place.

I have seen mempool with over 50,000 transactions for many days in a row, perhaps weeks, so, should this actually be called a quasi-payment system where it is possible any given transaction may eventually be forgotten about if the user does not keep on top of it?

**Tags:** transactions, unconfirmed-transactions, mempool, bandwidth

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Shouldn't the user who signs the transaction look at the required fees at a given point in time so that his transaction proceeds smoothly? If I just use 546 Satoshi as fees, my transaction is most likely not getting confirmed for a long time.  
> **username_0**: @BlockGuru It is true, of course as you suggest. I usually choose three-day confirmation using the software, however, sometimes the transaction does not confirm for many weeks due to fluctuations in the mempool and the discretion of the miners.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-03-10. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

> A search for definitive information turned up literally nothing, so, what happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded for an extended period?

The same thing as always happens: miners decide, at their own discretion, which transactions to include in their blocks. Most likely they will choose those that have the highest fees. Transactions that don't go in the blocks remain unconfirmed. There is no special handling for such a case.

> After a period of two weeks (default) transactions are dropped from mempool, if this continues for three months then all transactions from weeks one through eleven will need to be resubmitted a) when the load on mempool dies down a bit or b) with higher fees excluding some other transaction in its place.

That's correct. If the user still cares about having the transaction confirmed, they (or their software or their wallet provider) will need to do one of those two things.

> I have seen mempool with over 50,000 transactions for many days in a row, perhaps weeks, so, should this actually be called a quasi-payment system where it is possible any given transaction may eventually be forgotten about if the user does not keep on top of it?

It's true that Bitcoin does not provide any guarantee that a given transaction will ever be confirmed, and it never did. That simply isn't a design feature. Feel free to call it a "quasi-payment system" if you like that term better.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you for your answer and expert opinion. Quasi-payment system is not intended to be a derogatory phrase, merely an observation of the operation.  

---

