<p>I believe the problem is that the amount being sent (<code>0.0000024 BTC</code>) might have been too small and therefore below the "dust threshold" <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6793#issuecomment-147089803" rel="nofollow">listed in this old thread</a> as <code>0.00002730 BTC</code> when <code>minrelayfee</code> = <code>0.00005</code> for a normal transaction. Here is <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/28ad4d9fc2be102786a8c6c32ebecb466b2a03dd/src/primitives/transaction.h#L161" rel="nofollow">the code</a> that determines what is "dust".  Comment says:</p>

<pre><code>// "Dust" is defined in terms of CTransaction::minRelayTxFee,
// which has units satoshis-per-kilobyte.
// If you'd pay more than 1/3 in fees
// to spend something, then we consider it dust.
// A typical spendable txout is 34 bytes big, and will
// need a CTxIn of at least 148 bytes to spend:
// so dust is a spendable txout less than
// 546*minRelayTxFee/1000 (in satoshis)
</code></pre>

<p>Note: A <a href="https://blockchain.info/tx/61ef08eef99e74f9dd6037c6aff3b8b0703fd86371c259a6c4b6bfd2cd7eacf3" rel="nofollow">previous transaction with exact same fee but larger outputs</a> went through just fine.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T12:58:37.200Z
Is it stuck forever ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T12:59:56.730Z
Does it effect my other transitions ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T13:51:09.540Z
The other transactions that you made after that one from the same address will be dependent on it.  You could try to double-spend as @jonas-schnelli suggested.

If using Blockchain.info, probably best to contact their tech support for help.
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T13:54:40.070Z
but when i double spend do i need to spend more in the fees ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T13:55:57.447Z
will Blockchain.info they cancel it  ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T13:58:20.727Z
And what should i write to them
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T14:37:55.317Z
Your transaction was cleared, all should be good now: https://blockchain.info/address/15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T11:02:16.760Z
2016-05-26T11:07:33.987Z
2016-05-26T11:07:33.987Z
Jonathan Cross
<p>Your transaction is using a extremely low fee (0.0001 BTC for 226 bytes).
It might never confirm.</p>

<p>What you should try to do is double-spend your own transaction with a higher fee.
You just need to try to create a transaction with the same input: 61ef08eef99e74f9dd6037c6aff3b8b0703fd86371c259a6c4b6bfd2cd7eacf3/vout:1 and maybe the same output but a higher fee (less change).</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T09:29:22.277Z
thx for comment if i have more transion that i made which arent conifrmed too if the one i mntion here wont be confirmed will it affect them ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T09:39:31.543Z
is double spending safe ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T10:04:22.023Z
`0.0001 BTC` for 226 bytes is not super low, I was able to send 2 such transactions yesterday and both confirmed immediately.  According to https://bitcoinfees.21.co - This fee should generally confirm within 0-1 blocks (0-45 min) on average.  The optimal fee of `0.0000006 BTC` / byte would be just `0.0001356 BTC`.  I think there may be something else blocking this transaction.
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T10:26:19.087Z
In the first one it says the transiction has a very small output and its none standard and the two other i did with higer values it says "the transiction is spending an input which is unconfirmed" , will they ever go through ?
yair ed
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T08:44:06.257Z
2016-05-26T08:44:06.257Z
Jonas Schnelli
<p>I have this transaction :</p>

<p><a href="https://blockchain.info/tx/8fdb3e8a0a33b3d1721b6ef7c1c2608b1e1a8aacd8857e22287b120c09ee988a" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/tx/8fdb3e8a0a33b3d1721b6ef7c1c2608b1e1a8aacd8857e22287b120c09ee988a</a></p>

<p>I understand it's stuck because of the low value i spended but look at the fee.</p>

<p>Do you know how much time it will take to be confirmed ?</p>

<p>Can i do somthing to make it confirm faster ?</p>

<p>I was thinkig to merge it with this one : </p>

<p><a href="https://blockchain.info/tx/25f232656860a196b3e694275cc217c6382f638230663de13946ba5e4df80a1d" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/tx/25f232656860a196b3e694275cc217c6382f638230663de13946ba5e4df80a1d</a></p>

<p>Is it possible ? </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-26T10:05:36.810Z
It looks like there is some strange stuff going on here, did you see this note: "This transaction has a very small output and is none standard."  Do you own the address [15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk](https://blockchain.info/address/15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk)?
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-30T11:29:57.167Z
There is no need to put a "[solved]" marker into your question text. Since you've accepted an answer, you've already marked this question as "solved".
Murch
<transactions><unconfirmed-transactions>
I have a stuck transaction (2 days already)
yair ed
# I have a stuck transaction (2 days already)

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-05-26)

I have this transaction :

<https://blockchain.info/tx/8fdb3e8a0a33b3d1721b6ef7c1c2608b1e1a8aacd8857e22287b120c09ee988a>

I understand it's stuck because of the low value i spended but look at the fee.

Do you know how much time it will take to be confirmed ?

Can i do somthing to make it confirm faster ?

I was thinkig to merge it with this one :

<https://blockchain.info/tx/25f232656860a196b3e694275cc217c6382f638230663de13946ba5e4df80a1d>

Is it possible ?

**Tags:** transactions, unconfirmed-transactions

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: It looks like there is some strange stuff going on here, did you see this note: "This transaction has a very small output and is none standard."  Do you own the address [15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk](https://blockchain.info/address/15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk)?  
> **username_2**: There is no need to put a "[solved]" marker into your question text. Since you've accepted an answer, you've already marked this question as "solved".  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-05-26. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

I believe the problem is that the amount being sent (0.0000024 BTC) might have been too small and therefore below the "dust threshold" listed in this old thread as 0.00002730 BTC when minrelayfee = 0.00005 for a normal transaction. Here is the code that determines what is "dust".  Comment says:
// "Dust" is defined in terms of CTransaction::minRelayTxFee,
// which has units satoshis-per-kilobyte.
// If you'd pay more than 1/3 in fees
// to spend something, then we consider it dust.
// A typical spendable txout is 34 bytes big, and will
// need a CTxIn of at least 148 bytes to spend:
// so dust is a spendable txout less than
// 546*minRelayTxFee/1000 (in satoshis)

Note: A previous transaction with exact same fee but larger outputs went through just fine.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Is it stuck forever ?  
> **username_0**: Does it effect my other transitions ?  
> **username_1**: The other transactions that you made after that one from the same address will be dependent on it.  You could try to double-spend as @jonas-schnelli suggested.  If using Blockchain.info, probably best to contact their tech support for help.  
> **username_0**: but when i double spend do i need to spend more in the fees ?  
> **username_0**: will Blockchain.info they cancel it  ?  
> **username_0**: And what should i write to them  
> **username_1**: Your transaction was cleared, all should be good now: https://blockchain.info/address/15DkCkxCDE6aUNNSLHyDRCDARiRBwSHmbk  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-05-26. Score: 1

Your transaction is using a extremely low fee (0.0001 BTC for 226 bytes).
It might never confirm.

What you should try to do is double-spend your own transaction with a higher fee.
You just need to try to create a transaction with the same input: 61ef08eef99e74f9dd6037c6aff3b8b0703fd86371c259a6c4b6bfd2cd7eacf3/vout:1 and maybe the same output but a higher fee (less change).

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: thx for comment if i have more transion that i made which arent conifrmed too if the one i mntion here wont be confirmed will it affect them ?  
> **username_0**: is double spending safe ?  
> **username_1**: `0.0001 BTC` for 226 bytes is not super low, I was able to send 2 such transactions yesterday and both confirmed immediately.  According to https://bitcoinfees.21.co - This fee should generally confirm within 0-1 blocks (0-45 min) on average.  The optimal fee of `0.0000006 BTC` / byte would be just `0.0001356 BTC`.  I think there may be something else blocking this transaction.  
> **username_0**: In the first one it says the transiction has a very small output and its none standard and the two other i did with higer values it says "the transiction is spending an input which is unconfirmed" , will they ever go through ?  

---

