You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Users are currently experiencing difficulty determining which transaction to bump to ensure it gets confirmed. The current system can lead to confusion, as bumping the oldest transaction with a small fee may still not result in confirmation due the a fact that oldest tx (time) may not have lowest nonce (was already bumped once)
Solution to address this issue:
Disable “Bump Fee” for txs with higher nonce: Only the bump button for the transaction with the lowest nonce should remain enabled. This will guide users to prioritize the oldest transaction first.
Add Tooltips to Disabled Buttons: Implement tooltips on disabled buttons indicating that the user must first bump the fee for the transaction with the lowest nonce. This tooltip will provide clarity on the required action.
Possible downsides:
In case user has all txs underprices, he has to wait for the oldest one to get confirmed to bump the rest. If that is problematic, we can introduce modal or add nonce to pending tx
Please take in mind also this change which can make it even more confusing #12975
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
tomasklim
changed the title
Disable bump fee for newer txs or find better solution for marking what tx has to be bumped first
Disable “Bump Fee” for txs with higher nonce than the lowest pending
Jul 29, 2024
Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) TrezorSuiteDev/24.10.0 Chrome/124.0.6367.243 Electron/30.3.1 Safari/537.36
Users are currently experiencing difficulty determining which transaction to bump to ensure it gets confirmed. The current system can lead to confusion, as bumping the oldest transaction with a small fee may still not result in confirmation due the a fact that oldest tx (time) may not have lowest nonce (was already bumped once)
Solution to address this issue:
Possible downsides:
Please take in mind also this change which can make it even more confusing #12975
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: