sweep private key gives error Transaction was rejected when Broadcasting

[unkownsz]

Hello, I really need help. I have a btc address with many small transactions. I tried to Sweep private key (p2wpkh) and when I select any fee target (even the max), I get the error

"The server returned an error when broadcasting the transaction. Consider trying to connect to a different server, or updating Electrum.
The transaction was rejected because it is too large (in bytes)"

https://imgur.com/YdHEPCt

https://imgur.com/a/vLpJGsx


when I try to import the key, I see address, but it shows 0 balance 0 tx and keep syncing, so I can't see the transactions to choose from so I can try to do any utxo consolidation .


On Blockstream Explorer, it shows confirmed Unspent 4043 outputs.
https://blockstream.info/address/bc1qjtvat577yk3cslp7w4xf9z96xazrc35kh9y4f7



I am stuck and I really appreciate any help.

[DireWolfM14]

Electrum can only handle so many UTXOs in one transaction.  I can't remember the exact number, but I want to say it's 500.  Try using coin control to select a fewer number of UTXOs, and make multiple transactions.  Select "View" and "Coins" from the main menu, and on the "Coins" tab you can select as many UTXOs as you like, then right click and select "Add to coin control."

You can try selecting 2000 or so UTXOs, and splitting it up into two or three transactions, but if my memory is right about that 500 number you'll need to create 9 total transactions to get all your UTXOs consolidated.

[hd49728]

How to spend specific UTXOs in Electrum wallet.
How to consolidate Bitcoin UTXOs in Electrum wallet.

Electrum has Coin control feature and users can choose specific UTXOs for their transactions, above are some guides on it with Electrum wallet.

Bitcoin UTXO management guide.

[LoyceV]

Electrum can only handle so many UTXOs in one transaction.

That's not just Electrum, the transaction size limit is a limitation in Bitcoin.

I have a btc address with many small transactions.

You're going to want to read my topic on consolidating small inputs.

On Blockstream Explorer, it shows confirmed Unspent 4043 outputs.
https://blockstream.info/address/bc1qjtvat577yk3cslp7w4xf9z96xazrc35kh9y4f7

You kinda screwed yourself collecting so many dust inputs! In the future, try to avoid this and only withdraw larger amounts on-chain.
I'd start by consolidating the largest ones, and don't select "the highest fee"! You have $10k in Bitcoin, and your challenge will be to spend as little of that on transaction fees as possible.

My estimate: with 4000 inputs, about 100 sat per input (that's a rough estimate) and 2 sat/vbyte, you're paying 0.008 BTC in transaction fees. That's less than 10% of your total. If you don't pay attention to fees, you could end up spending the majority of your Bitcoins in fees. If you wait for lower fees, you could pay only half but that may take a very long time.

[ABCbits]

Electrum can only handle so many UTXOs in one transaction.

That's not just Electrum, the transaction size limit is a limitation in Bitcoin.

To be exact, most full nodes only accept transaction with size below 100 vKB while OP's TX is about 274 vKB. So OP should create 3 smaller TX and use much lower TX fee rate if he's not in hurry.

[unkownsz]

Thank you All for the help. I know i screwed myself collecting all these small transfers on the same address.
 

Electrum can only handle so many UTXOs in one transaction.  I can't remember the exact number, but I want to say it's 500.  Try using coin control to select a fewer number of UTXOs, and make multiple transactions.  Select "View" and "Coins" from the main menu, and on the "Coins" tab you can select as many UTXOs as you like, then right click and select "Add to coin control."

You can try selecting 2000 or so UTXOs, and splitting it up into two or three transactions, but if my memory is right about that 500 number you'll need to create 9 total transactions to get all your UTXOs consolidated.

Unfortunately i couldn't do any coin control, as the wallet shows 0 Balance & 0 Tx, the "Coins" tab is empty showing 0 unspent transaction outputs. On the left bottom status stuck as Synchronizing. Not sure what i am doing wrong.

https://imgur.com/iqutI6v
https://imgur.com/mzJ7stz

To be exact, most full nodes only accept transaction with size below 100 vKB while OP's TX is about 274 vKB. So OP should create 3 smaller TX and use much lower TX fee rate if he's not in hurry.

Is it possible that I create a new full node & change the TX to a bigger size then use my node to do the transfer? I am not in a hurry, just want to figure it out.

 

[LoyceV]

Unfortunately i couldn't do any coin control, as the wallet shows 0 Balance & 0 Tx, the "Coins" tab is empty showing 0 unspent transaction outputs. On the left bottom status stuck as Synchronizing. Not sure what i am doing wrong.

You're not doing anything wrong. Electrum has a hard time loading this many (>10,000) transactions.

Is it possible that I create a new full node & change the TX to a bigger size then use my node to do the transfer? I am not in a hurry, just want to figure it out.

Here's what I'd do:
Install Bitcoin Core. Create a non-descriptor wallet (the "old" format), and import your private key. Then let it sync. It can be pruned, since you're syncing it after importing the private key. Depending on your computer (RAM, SSD), this takes many hours up to several days.
Once it's done, enable Coin Control, create a few transactions with manually selected inputs and manual transaction fee, and send your coins to a new address. Think about what wallet you want to use for this before sending them.

Don't trust any PM offers you may get to "help" you.

[nc50lc]

-snip-

Here's what I'd do:
Install Bitcoin Core. Create a non-descriptor wallet (the "old" format), and import your private key. Then let it sync.

Alternatively, and recommended on the latest version since you can't create a legacy wallet without using -deprecatedrpc=create_bdb command line arg/setting.
Create a new blank wallet (descriptor by default, tick "Make Blank Wallet") and import the private key with "combo" descriptor.

@unkownsz After creating the wallet;
Go to Bitcoin Core's Window->Console and type: getdescriptorinfo "combo(YOUR_PRIVATE_KEY)" take note of its 8-character "checksum" to use below.
Then import it using: importdescriptors "[{\"desc\": \"combo(YOUR_PRIVATE_KEY)#CHECKSUM\",\"label\": \"YOUR_LABEL\",\"timestamp\": \"0\"}]"

Then let Bitcoin Core sync/rescan.

[pooya87]

If you are willing to put in a little effort and learn a thing or two in the process and if privacy is not your concern, then instead of going through the heavy process of syncing a full node to fetch UTXOs you could just use a block explorer API to do that.

There are some tools available for that. For example these two:
https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=1701507.0
https://coinb.in/#newTransaction

The process is basically to
- connect to the block explorer API to fetch the UTXOs
- manually select what you want to spend
- set the output (receiving address) and the fee
- create a raw unsigned tx
- transfer that to a trustworthy wallet (preferably offline) that you'd imported your private key into
- sign that tx there
- bring the signed tx to an online machine and then use any tool you want to first decode and preview it to make sure it is correct.
- broadcast it (it could be broadcast using Electrum, or block explorers' push page)

I checked coinb.in and with default settings it could not fetch your UTXOs, you have to go to the settings (it is under Help menu) https://coinb.in/#settings and change the API it uses to fetch the UTXOs to something else. Then just fill in the rest. You may need to remove the inputs to make the tx smaller and you should set the Amount in the output manually in a way that you also set the fee meaning you have to calculate the fee rate in your mind.

If you liked that approach, I can go into more details on how things work...

[ABCbits]

Electrum can only handle so many UTXOs in one transaction.  I can't remember the exact number, but I want to say it's 500.  Try using coin control to select a fewer number of UTXOs, and make multiple transactions.  Select "View" and "Coins" from the main menu, and on the "Coins" tab you can select as many UTXOs as you like, then right click and select "Add to coin control."

You can try selecting 2000 or so UTXOs, and splitting it up into two or three transactions, but if my memory is right about that 500 number you'll need to create 9 total transactions to get all your UTXOs consolidated.

Unfortunately i couldn't do any coin control, as the wallet shows 0 Balance & 0 Tx, the "Coins" tab is empty showing 0 unspent transaction outputs. On the left bottom status stuck as Synchronizing. Not sure what i am doing wrong.

At least for sync problem, it can be solved by running your own Electrum server where you modify to increase request limit or ease down anti-DDoS. But i expect you'll still face different problem, since Electrum itself is terrible when many address/input is involved.

To be exact, most full nodes only accept transaction with size below 100 vKB while OP's TX is about 274 vKB. So OP should create 3 smaller TX and use much lower TX fee rate if he's not in hurry.

Is it possible that I create a new full node & change the TX to a bigger size then use my node to do the transfer? I am not in a hurry, just want to figure it out.

You could follow @LoyceV suggestion. But you still need to create 3 smaller TX, since you need other full node to broadcast your TX in order to receive miner's node.

[nc50lc]

At least for sync problem, it can be solved by running your own Electrum server where you modify to increase request limit or ease down anti-DDoS. But i expect you'll still face different problem, since Electrum itself is terrible when many address/input is involved.

Plus setting up his own Electrum server requires a full node client anyways so he may just use the full node client's wallet to import the private key and ditch the additional layers on the setup.
Bitcoin Core supports Coin Control just like Electrum.

[unkownsz]

Thank you All for your help and specially @LoyceV & @nc50lc

-snip-

Here's what I'd do:
Install Bitcoin Core. Create a non-descriptor wallet (the "old" format), and import your private key. Then let it sync.

Alternatively, and recommended on the latest version since you can't create a legacy wallet without using -deprecatedrpc=create_bdb command line arg/setting.
Create a new blank wallet (descriptor by default, tick "Make Blank Wallet") and import the private key with "combo" descriptor.

@unkownsz After creating the wallet;
Go to Bitcoin Core's Window->Console and type: getdescriptorinfo "combo(YOUR_PRIVATE_KEY)" take note of its 8-character "checksum" to use below.
Then import it using: importdescriptors "[{\"desc\": \"combo(YOUR_PRIVATE_KEY)#CHECKSUM\",\"label\": \"YOUR_LABEL\",\"timestamp\": \"0\"}]"

Then let Bitcoin Core sync/rescan.

I installed Bitcoin Core and sync, used importdescriptors command so i imoprted my keys and can see all the transactions.
Then i successfully sent some of the transactions however some of the transactions i chose low fews so these transactions got stuck for days as unconfirmed.

I tried to choose "increase transaction fee" but i get this error:

Increasing transaction fee failed
(Unable to create transaction. Transaction needs a change address, but we can't generate it. Error: No bech32 addresses available.)

In the receive tab, i cannot create new receiving address "its dimmed"

any idea how to create a new receiving address, to my wallet so i can use it as a change address to increase the fees.

Thank you all

[LoyceV]

i chose low fews so these transactions got stuck for days as unconfirmed.

How low did you set the fee? It's supposed to be low, or you'll be paying a huge percentage on transaction fees. Bitcoin transaction fees went up a bit recently, so it's a lot cheaper if you just wait for lower fees again.

[nc50lc]

I tried to choose "increase transaction fee" but i get this error:

Increasing transaction fee failed
(Unable to create transaction. Transaction needs a change address, but we can't generate it. Error: No bech32 addresses available.)

Without questioning how you got into that situation,
The solution to this is to either use "original_change_index" named arg to bumpfee command, generate a new HD key that will be used to create HD wallet descriptors or import one parent descriptor to be used for change.
I recommend the former since the latter two require you to generate a new master private key, one will let Bitcoin Core generate it the other one may be created elsewhere.
But to safely use the command, you must identify which output is the original change since the excess will be sent there (output index starts with '0' = first output)

To add the named arg, you should use bitcoin-cli to use bumpfee command.
server=1 should be added to your config file if you're using Bitcoin-qt.

Sample command:

Code:

./bitcoin-cli --named --rpcwallet=<WALLET_NAME> bumpfee <TXID> original_change_index=0

[alexeyneu]

use 'sweep wallet' in coinomi. if it'll not work you have zero chances

[nc50lc]

use 'sweep wallet' in coinomi. if it'll not work you have zero chances

Does Coinomi evaluates the number of available UTXO and only use the necessary number of input not to exceed the maximum standard transaction size?
If so, that would've been useful in OP's original issue if he used that wallet to sweep.
Otherwise, it'll not be anything different than what he initially did.

[alexeyneu]

use 'sweep wallet' in coinomi. if it'll not work you have zero chances

Does Coinomi evaluates the number of available UTXO and only use the necessary number of input not to exceed the maximum standard transaction size?
If so, that would've been useful in OP's original issue if he used that wallet to sweep.
Otherwise, it'll not be anything different than what he initially did.

no, i guess they'll use whole thing otherwise it's not a sweep already. But worth to try anyway. At least they have working full node on their server.
He can use createrawtransaction from api and forget about sweep . Blockchain.info has sweep also . some chances that one of the two has workaround on that