pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 29 May 2023
It could but evidence is surely needed. Can any of the folks who experience force closes point to a calculation based on mempool.space as the reason for a specific close?
If closes can be triggered by the fee market then that input would be a good metric to log.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 29 May 2023
Is not a bug in mempool.space.
Force closure yes could happen when peers can't agree on fees and also for many other reasons. But that doesn't mean is a bug or something wrong using neutrino sync or mempool.space for estimate fees.
I know for a fact that for Blixt wallet (neutrino client) the fees are not estimate by mempool.space by by Lightning Labs server
https://nodes.lightning.computer/fees/v1/btc-fee-estimates.json
Each wallet that uses neutrino is free to use whatever source for fee estimates.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 29 May 2023
There is a bug relating to calculating fees for next block templates. My assumption is that is extended to general fee estimates but I'm not sure. You cant rule out differences between bitcoin core fee estimates and non core estimates. Differences in them can cause force closures and we will see bigger differences with more active mempools like we have.
https://github.com/mempool/mempool/issues/3658
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 29 May 2023
I notice some node runners, trying to increase their local mempool size in their umbrel/mynode/raspiblitz bundle node.
Could this affect also on fee estimates for their nodes?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 29 May 2023
I don't think it would but I don't know the internals about how core estimates fees. It could be smart, or esplora could be smarter but if there's a big enough difference and not enough leeway then it would make lightning unusable across different estimation types.
reply