Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Increasing fee for contract call leads to this error while transaction is still broadcasted succesfully: There was an error broadcasting your transaction (unable to broadcast transaction) #5305

Closed
314159265359879 opened this issue Apr 24, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #5377
Assignees
Labels
area:broadcasting area:increase-fees area:stacks bug Functionality broken bug-p3 Non-critical functionality broken for many users, or there are clear workarounds effort:medium Expected to take 2-5 days of integration work

Comments

@314159265359879
Copy link
Contributor

Reproduction steps.

  1. Create a transaction, must be a contract call, for example a swap on app.alexlab.co
  2. Then increase the fee via the activity tab
  3. increase the fee by a small amount for example 0.00001 STX
  4. And then broadcast/sign
  5. See error, in the wallet
  6. Check the pending transactions on the explorer and you can confirm the transaction with higher fee was broadcasted afterall:

Increasing fee with Leather (hardware wallet or software wallet)
image

Error displayed in the wallet
image

Console error
image

Tested on version 6.35.1 with software wallet and hardware wallet, similar result. Increasing the fee on a STX transaction does not lead to the error.

@314159265359879 314159265359879 added bug Functionality broken bug-p3 Non-critical functionality broken for many users, or there are clear workarounds area:broadcasting area:stacks area:increase-fees labels Apr 24, 2024
@314159265359879
Copy link
Contributor Author

It looks like "nonce conflict" is (sometimes) shown momentarily before the error page pops up or at the same time. The transaction is still broadcasted and can be found in the mempool afterwards, odd right?

When increasing the fee technically we are using the same nonce but when the fee is higher that "nonce conflict" error is not expected because it RBF's the old transaction.

@314159265359879
Copy link
Contributor Author

@314159265359879
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think this report is also related to this:

Possible defect: This happens when the pending queue is full. If you increase the network fee of an existing pending transaction, a 'rejected' error is displayed. This appears to indicate the increase failed. However, the initial pending transaction is still dropped and a new pending transaction cre…

@alter-eggo alter-eggo added the effort:medium Expected to take 2-5 days of integration work label May 1, 2024
@alter-eggo alter-eggo linked a pull request May 17, 2024 that will close this issue
kyranjamie pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 22, 2024
## [6.41.0](v6.40.0...v6.41.0) (2024-05-22)

### Features

* remove increase fee summary page, closes [#5305](#5305) ([2db97bd](2db97bd))

### Bug Fixes

* fix padding on back button, ref leather-wallet/issues[#25](#25) ([3a42fc9](3a42fc9))
* investigate stx fee issues ([c5e04c1](c5e04c1))
* missing token color ([caa4c88](caa4c88))
* regtest address generation, closes [#5401](#5401) ([0c6c4d1](0c6c4d1))
* sip10 token send form fees bug ([5903a7b](5903a7b))
* stamp error reporting ([9b77421](9b77421))
* tsconfig update for tokens pkg ([9699d76](9699d76))

### Internal

* add defensive code and better analytics for broadcast errors, ref [#5118](#5118) ([a36dae4](a36dae4))
* post-release merge back ([ca9cf0b](ca9cf0b))
* remove combined asset model, closes [#48](#48) ([a827b40](a827b40))
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:broadcasting area:increase-fees area:stacks bug Functionality broken bug-p3 Non-critical functionality broken for many users, or there are clear workarounds effort:medium Expected to take 2-5 days of integration work
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants