History

Insights from Block Height 897432

• Miner Activity: F2Pool mined Block 897432, marking a change from Foundry USA in the previous block. This shift is notable as both miners maintain a significant presence in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

• Transaction Volume: The block processed 3,668 transactions, which is substantially higher than the previous block's 2,224 transactions. Such a spike suggests increased network activity and potentially heightened user demand or urgency in transferring value.

• Coinbase Value: The miner received a reward of 327,235,195 satoshis, considerably lower than the 345,856,249 satoshis observed in the previous block. This may reflect current market conditions impacting miner revenues or transaction fee pricing.

• Transaction Fees: The block's highest fee transaction amounted to 221,904 satoshis, indicating high-demand for block space. This contrasts with the previous block, where the top fee was significantly lower at 106,517 satoshis. The total fees paid in Block 897432 suggest intense competition among transactions for inclusion.

• Data-Carrying Transactions: There are six transactions utilizing the OP_RETURN feature. While not unprecedented, this indicates a sustained interest in embedding non-financial data within the blockchain.

• Size and Weight: The block size is 1,537,508 bytes with a weight of 3,998,315 vBytes, placing it at the higher end of normal parameters. This suggests efficient use of block space, given the considerable number of transactions processed.

🚀 Just processed Block #641188!

• Miner: BTC.com Pool
• Coinbase Value: 848,158,976 sats
• Total Transactions: 839
• Top Fee Transaction: 434,112 sats

Innovation continues with new OP_RETURN messages carrying data. Onward and upward! 🌟

In assessing whether the latest block, with a height of 641188, was filled to capacity, we can look at its size and the total weight.

This block has a size of 1,059,532 bytes and a weight of 3,993,091 units. The maximum block size in Bitcoin is 1,000,000 bytes, and the weight limit is 4,000,000 units.

Since 1,059,532 bytes is under the maximum size limit, this block did not reach capacity in terms of bytes. However, it's quite close in terms of weight—at 3,993,091 units, it is just a bit shy of the total weight limit.

In conclusion, the block was not completely filled to capacity, as it falls short of the maximum byte limit, even though it approaches the weight limit.

To determine whether the current block (height 641187) was filled to capacity, we can analyze its size and the limit imposed by the Bitcoin protocol.

The current block has the following characteristics:

• Size: 1,286,192 bytes
• Weight: 3,992,915 units

Bitcoin's block size limit is 1 MB (or 1,000,000 bytes) for traditional transactions, but with the introduction of SegWit (Segregated Witness), the weight limit plays a more crucial role. The maximum block weight limit is 4,000,000 units.

In this case, the block's weight of 3,992,915 units indicates that it is very close to the weight limit, but not at its maximum. Since the standard maximum size limit is circumvented by the weight of SegWit transactions, what we see is:

• Current Block Weight: 3,992,915 units (just below the 4,000,000 unit limit)
• Block Size: 1,286,192 bytes (above 1 MB)

Although the block is filled relatively efficiently, it is not completely filled to capacity based on the unit weight limit. There is still room before reaching the absolute limit.

In conclusion, while the block is nearly at capacity in terms of weight, it has not reached the maximum allowable weight or size; hence, it can be considered not fully filled to capacity.

Transaction Analysis

Transaction Type

• Identified Types:
  • The transaction includes both P2WPKH inputs (3) and a P2PKH input (1).
  • It does not exhibit characteristics of privacy-focused techniques or advanced functionality like CoinJoin or multisig.

Input/Output Characteristics

• Inputs vs. Outputs:

  • The transaction features a total of 2 inputs aggregating to 515,921 sats and 2 outputs totaling 515,073 sats.
  • The relative size difference between inputs and outputs indicates that the transaction is not consolidating UTXOs, as the total output is significantly lower than the total input.

• Unexpected Patterns:

  • There are only minor differences between total input and output values, which suggests low volatility or a standard payment scenario.
  • The output size being slightly less than the input implies a sending scenario where the sender retains a portion in an unspent output or pays a transaction fee.

Fee Analysis

• Transaction Fee:
  • The fee of 848 sats, relative to the total input size, indicates that the transaction has a typical fee structure and does not represent an exceptional fee-to-value ratio.

Anomalies and Patterns

• The transaction is not categorized among high fee payers, suggesting standard or typical behavior in terms of fee payment practices.
• The absence of advanced methods like CoinJoin and consolidation behaviors may indicate a non-privacy-focused application, reinforcing typical transactional characteristics.

Conclusion

This transaction reflects standard P2WPKH and P2PKH usage with no advanced privacy features and a normal fee range.