<p>One cannot say for sure what is happening without seeing the transaction ID, but it's likely that this is being caused by <a href="https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the current transaction backlog of about 62,000 or so unconfirmed transactions</a>.</p>

<p>If the transaction being discussed has a low fee (relative to the other 62,000 unconfirmed transactions) the transaction being discussed may not be confirmed until a large number of those other unconfirmed transactions have been confirmed.</p>

<p>Two possible outcomes are that the transaction is eventually confirmed or that the transaction will eventually get dropped from the network and you will still have control of those bitcoins.</p>

<p>EDIT: <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0125.mediawiki" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 125 Opt-in Full Replace-by-Fee Signaling</a> provides a flagging option for dealing with this, though I'm not sure if any Bitcoin clients currently provide userfriendly support for this.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-24T15:52:10.493Z
Right now these are getting more again. The link in the last paragraph, can I use this somehow?
user43501
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-25T21:05:50.147Z
Unfortunately not, except for with future transactions. From the BIP: "The opt-in full Replace-by-Fee (opt-in full-RBF) signaling policy described here allows spenders to add a signal to a transaction indicating that they want to be able to replace that transaction in the future."
Michael C Ippolito
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-23T18:11:36.917Z
2016-11-23T18:38:07.937Z
2016-11-23T18:38:07.937Z
Michael C Ippolito
<p>to say this upfront: I know these kind of questions have been asked before, but I already tried some things and I really don't have the knowledge what to do next. </p>

<p>I recently tried to send an amount of BTC from a Bitcoin Core wallet. After one whole day, the transaction still has the status "0/unconfirmed, in memory pool" in Bitcoin Core.
I've tried restarting with options (rescan; zapwallettxes), but it didn't work. I also used the dumpprivkey command and imported this key into a blockchain.info wallet. It says there's no money on it...</p>

<p>How can I get this money back?</p>

<p><img src="https://www.sumopaint.com/images/temp/xzdbrkqgtihmrpdk.png" alt="screenshot of &#39;information&#39;"></p>

<p>Edit: Solved. Like Michael C Ippolito said, the transaction has been confirmed eventually. I thank you for your answers.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-23T15:25:04.243Z
Weird. Does looking up the address (addresses start with `1abc...`) on a [different  block explorer](https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC) give you something different? How many blocks does your client have under Help -> Debug window -> Information -> Current number of blocks ?
Nick ODell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-23T17:34:48.280Z
What exact differences am I looking for at blockchain/Block explorer?
user43501
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-23T22:24:14.987Z
A difference in balance.
Nick ODell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-24T03:04:53.323Z
Balance is exactly the same. I guess the transaction ID is public anyway so I can post it here? 803d7b295895e1fffc0897ae55b1c26caa27b3bc237a87f22dc4cfc1f3e2bd57
user43501
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-24T03:57:05.037Z
Are you sure you imported the right key into blockchain.info? Make sure you're not importing the key that you sent the money to - import the key that you sent the money from.
Nick ODell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-24T07:55:38.283Z
Ok, I couldn't find the key I sent from directly in BTC Core, so I used the one I sent to to find the other one on blockchain.info. Then I used this to find out the private key. This private key I imported under 'addresses' in my blockchain wallet. I tried both a already used and a new wallet. Blockchain told me the key was ok, but there's no money on it. Did all this before I wrote here first. If I click on the transaction on blockchain, it says: 'Estimated Confirmation Time Very Soon (High Priority)' ; Anyway, it's been like that since I first took a look at it.
user43501
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-27T13:28:50.300Z
Since the transaction wasn't confirmed yet, the receiving address didn't have a balance yet. That's to be expected. Blockchain.info's "High Priority" is a fixed limit of Satoshi/byte, unfortunately, they haven't fixed its behavior although it has been criticized for years that it isn't accurate.
Murch
<transactions><bitcoin-core>
transaction stays in status "0/unconfirmed, in memory pool"
user43501
# transaction stays in status "0/unconfirmed, in memory pool"

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-11-23)

to say this upfront: I know these kind of questions have been asked before, but I already tried some things and I really don't have the knowledge what to do next.

I recently tried to send an amount of BTC from a Bitcoin Core wallet. After one whole day, the transaction still has the status "0/unconfirmed, in memory pool" in Bitcoin Core.
I've tried restarting with options (rescan; zapwallettxes), but it didn't work. I also used the dumpprivkey command and imported this key into a blockchain.info wallet. It says there's no money on it...

How can I get this money back?

![screenshot of 'information'](https://www.sumopaint.com/images/temp/xzdbrkqgtihmrpdk.png)

Edit: Solved. Like username_3 C username_3 said, the transaction has been confirmed eventually. I thank you for your answers.

**Tags:** transactions, bitcoin-core

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Weird. Does looking up the address (addresses start with `1abc...`) on a [different  block explorer](https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC) give you something different? How many blocks does your client have under Help -> Debug window -> Information -> Current number of blocks ?  
> **username_0**: What exact differences am I looking for at blockchain/Block explorer?  
> **username_1**: A difference in balance.  
> **username_0**: Balance is exactly the same. I guess the transaction ID is public anyway so I can post it here? 803d7b295895e1fffc0897ae55b1c26caa27b3bc237a87f22dc4cfc1f3e2bd57  
> **username_1**: Are you sure you imported the right key into blockchain.info? Make sure you're not importing the key that you sent the money to - import the key that you sent the money from.  
> **username_0**: Ok, I couldn't find the key I sent from directly in BTC Core, so I used the one I sent to to find the other one on blockchain.info. Then I used this to find out the private key. This private key I imported under 'addresses' in my blockchain wallet. I tried both a already used and a new wallet. Blockchain told me the key was ok, but there's no money on it. Did all this before I wrote here first. If I click on the transaction on blockchain, it says: 'Estimated Confirmation Time Very Soon (High Priority)' ; Anyway, it's been like that since I first took a look at it.  
> **username_2**: Since the transaction wasn't confirmed yet, the receiving address didn't have a balance yet. That's to be expected. Blockchain.info's "High Priority" is a fixed limit of Satoshi/byte, unfortunately, they haven't fixed its behavior although it has been criticized for years that it isn't accurate.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-11-23. Score: 1

One cannot say for sure what is happening without seeing the transaction ID, but it's likely that this is being caused by [the current transaction backlog of about 62,000 or so unconfirmed transactions](https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions).

If the transaction being discussed has a low fee (relative to the other 62,000 unconfirmed transactions) the transaction being discussed may not be confirmed until a large number of those other unconfirmed transactions have been confirmed.

Two possible outcomes are that the transaction is eventually confirmed or that the transaction will eventually get dropped from the network and you will still have control of those bitcoins.

EDIT: [BIP 125 Opt-in Full Replace-by-Fee Signaling](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0125.mediawiki) provides a flagging option for dealing with this, though I'm not sure if any Bitcoin clients currently provide userfriendly support for this.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Right now these are getting more again. The link in the last paragraph, can I use this somehow?  
> **username_3**: Unfortunately not, except for with future transactions. From the BIP: "The opt-in full Replace-by-Fee (opt-in full-RBF) signaling policy described here allows spenders to add a signal to a transaction indicating that they want to be able to replace that transaction in the future."  

---

