Single tx included in two different blocksExtinct block in indexTwo blocks, two transactions, same hashHow many different destinations can a single transaction have?Is there database of orphaned blocks?How does a double spend get resolved when two miners find conflicting blocks at the same time?How do nodes behave in light of a doublespend?Misledgering possibility for double spending attackcan Bitcoin transactions are included in multiple blocks?Why most of pubkeys in the first batch of blocks in blk00000.dat are different
LilyPond - how to write a basic makefile
In OOP, isn't the 'protected' keyword required?
If a normal subgroup and its factor group are both abelian, then what can be said about the group?
How to delete data extensions if I can't access them?
Temporary queue to prevent duplication
Why "alle Tale" and not "alle Täler"?
Is Prismite considered colorless or all colors for the purpose of Brawl/Commander decks?
Relinquishing Green card at CA/Mexico border
Can a Druid Goblin use Nimble Escape while Wild Shaped into a non-agile animal form?
Should user input be validated for its length in PHP (server side) as a security measure?
Is there one website that contains all relevant DevOps news and gets updated on a daily basis?
Assuming P != NP, what is the cardinality of the set of NP-Hard languages?
Keep password in macro
Perambulating ants
Selective reduction of nitro group to amine, in benzene ring containing nitrile?
SQL Server: Multiple Availability Groups, one cluster, how do I keep the primary cluster node as primary?
Is the ESRI ArcGIS definition of California Albers projection using units of feet correct?
How to move directory into a directory with the same name?
Can one get into trouble if one doesn't show up at the gate 30 minutes before departure (or whatever time window the boarding pass is indicating)?
"Don't invest now because the market is high"
Is runnable pseudo code shunned?
Best spot within a human to place redundant heart
How could pirates reasonably transport dinosaurs in captivity, some of them enormous, across oceans?
How test case design is different for GUI & API?
Single tx included in two different blocks
Extinct block in indexTwo blocks, two transactions, same hashHow many different destinations can a single transaction have?Is there database of orphaned blocks?How does a double spend get resolved when two miners find conflicting blocks at the same time?How do nodes behave in light of a doublespend?Misledgering possibility for double spending attackcan Bitcoin transactions are included in multiple blocks?Why most of pubkeys in the first batch of blocks in blk00000.dat are different
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/a7bacce00e5df85d3547a3f83ac10c65eec30f715c1d77d8d4a7bc17fd470965
How is it possible that a single tx is included in two different blocks?
Isn't it considered double spending?
transactions doublespend
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
add a comment
|
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/a7bacce00e5df85d3547a3f83ac10c65eec30f715c1d77d8d4a7bc17fd470965
How is it possible that a single tx is included in two different blocks?
Isn't it considered double spending?
transactions doublespend
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
add a comment
|
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/a7bacce00e5df85d3547a3f83ac10c65eec30f715c1d77d8d4a7bc17fd470965
How is it possible that a single tx is included in two different blocks?
Isn't it considered double spending?
transactions doublespend
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/a7bacce00e5df85d3547a3f83ac10c65eec30f715c1d77d8d4a7bc17fd470965
How is it possible that a single tx is included in two different blocks?
Isn't it considered double spending?
transactions doublespend
transactions doublespend
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
asked Sep 26 at 8:18
Kevin PKevin P
495 bronze badges
495 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Occasionally, minor alternate chains emerge if multiple blocks are found for a given blockheight. Usually, these alternate chains only last for a single blocked, and are quickly dropped once another block has been found, allowing one chain to become longer (and thus have more work).
More rarely, these chains might last for a couple of blocks.
Block 525890 for this tx is not part of the main Bitcoin chain, and thus the tx was unspent when block 525891 was processed.
525889 ------ 525890 ------ 525891*
------ 525890*
The blocks marked with * contain the transaction in question here. As you can see, they occur on separate, parallel chains. Of these, only the chain extending 525891 survived, resulting in the version of block 525890 containing the transaction being dropped.
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
add a comment
|
That has to be a parsing error from blockchain.com side. It would be indeed a double-spend and therefore block 525891 would have been invalid.
If you check other explorers (e.g. blockstream or blockcypher) you'll see how they had only included it in block 525891.
Personally I find blockchain.info's explorer not to be too reliable.
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "308"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f90667%2fsingle-tx-included-in-two-different-blocks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Occasionally, minor alternate chains emerge if multiple blocks are found for a given blockheight. Usually, these alternate chains only last for a single blocked, and are quickly dropped once another block has been found, allowing one chain to become longer (and thus have more work).
More rarely, these chains might last for a couple of blocks.
Block 525890 for this tx is not part of the main Bitcoin chain, and thus the tx was unspent when block 525891 was processed.
525889 ------ 525890 ------ 525891*
------ 525890*
The blocks marked with * contain the transaction in question here. As you can see, they occur on separate, parallel chains. Of these, only the chain extending 525891 survived, resulting in the version of block 525890 containing the transaction being dropped.
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
add a comment
|
Occasionally, minor alternate chains emerge if multiple blocks are found for a given blockheight. Usually, these alternate chains only last for a single blocked, and are quickly dropped once another block has been found, allowing one chain to become longer (and thus have more work).
More rarely, these chains might last for a couple of blocks.
Block 525890 for this tx is not part of the main Bitcoin chain, and thus the tx was unspent when block 525891 was processed.
525889 ------ 525890 ------ 525891*
------ 525890*
The blocks marked with * contain the transaction in question here. As you can see, they occur on separate, parallel chains. Of these, only the chain extending 525891 survived, resulting in the version of block 525890 containing the transaction being dropped.
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
add a comment
|
Occasionally, minor alternate chains emerge if multiple blocks are found for a given blockheight. Usually, these alternate chains only last for a single blocked, and are quickly dropped once another block has been found, allowing one chain to become longer (and thus have more work).
More rarely, these chains might last for a couple of blocks.
Block 525890 for this tx is not part of the main Bitcoin chain, and thus the tx was unspent when block 525891 was processed.
525889 ------ 525890 ------ 525891*
------ 525890*
The blocks marked with * contain the transaction in question here. As you can see, they occur on separate, parallel chains. Of these, only the chain extending 525891 survived, resulting in the version of block 525890 containing the transaction being dropped.
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
Occasionally, minor alternate chains emerge if multiple blocks are found for a given blockheight. Usually, these alternate chains only last for a single blocked, and are quickly dropped once another block has been found, allowing one chain to become longer (and thus have more work).
More rarely, these chains might last for a couple of blocks.
Block 525890 for this tx is not part of the main Bitcoin chain, and thus the tx was unspent when block 525891 was processed.
525889 ------ 525890 ------ 525891*
------ 525890*
The blocks marked with * contain the transaction in question here. As you can see, they occur on separate, parallel chains. Of these, only the chain extending 525891 survived, resulting in the version of block 525890 containing the transaction being dropped.
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 9:16
Raghav SoodRaghav Sood
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
11.2k3 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
add a comment
|
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
You must be right. I doubled checked and my parser is using the same extinct block as blockchain.info. My block index must be wrong I will have to double check this.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 10:40
add a comment
|
That has to be a parsing error from blockchain.com side. It would be indeed a double-spend and therefore block 525891 would have been invalid.
If you check other explorers (e.g. blockstream or blockcypher) you'll see how they had only included it in block 525891.
Personally I find blockchain.info's explorer not to be too reliable.
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
add a comment
|
That has to be a parsing error from blockchain.com side. It would be indeed a double-spend and therefore block 525891 would have been invalid.
If you check other explorers (e.g. blockstream or blockcypher) you'll see how they had only included it in block 525891.
Personally I find blockchain.info's explorer not to be too reliable.
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
add a comment
|
That has to be a parsing error from blockchain.com side. It would be indeed a double-spend and therefore block 525891 would have been invalid.
If you check other explorers (e.g. blockstream or blockcypher) you'll see how they had only included it in block 525891.
Personally I find blockchain.info's explorer not to be too reliable.
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
That has to be a parsing error from blockchain.com side. It would be indeed a double-spend and therefore block 525891 would have been invalid.
If you check other explorers (e.g. blockstream or blockcypher) you'll see how they had only included it in block 525891.
Personally I find blockchain.info's explorer not to be too reliable.
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Sep 26 at 8:32
sr-gisr-gi
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
2,3821 gold badge8 silver badges31 bronze badges
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
add a comment
|
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
Actually I found out about the double spend using my own parser that returns an error because the same UTXO is used twice. I am parsing the blocks from my own full node.
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:53
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
And it agrees with blockchain info, the UTXO is created in block 525859 and spent in blocks 525890 and 525891
– Kevin P
Sep 26 at 8:56
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Bitcoin Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f90667%2fsingle-tx-included-in-two-different-blocks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
