Error while send transaction: Data push larger than necessary
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Looks like transaction decodes fine. But when I use sendrawtransaction I got
Data push larger than necessary
What's wrong with this tx?
bitcoin-cli -testnet decoderawtransaction 020000000149d4a5f520ded6fa94f79cd268f0334baeec9a7732c9d946d1cdee58d81e7aad00000000020101ffffffff01904c96000000000017a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a048700000000
{
"txid": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"hash": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"version": 2,
"size": 85,
"vsize": 85,
"weight": 340,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "ad7a1ed858eecdd146d9c932779aecae4b33f068d29cf794fad6de20f5a5d449",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "1",
"hex": "0101"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.09850000,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_HASH160 f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a04 OP_EQUAL",
"hex": "a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a0487",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "scripthash",
"addresses": [
"2NFXJy8mvz7ZiT4VVN29xPGC38hTygd3AyJ"
]
}
}
]
}
bitcoind raw-transaction
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Looks like transaction decodes fine. But when I use sendrawtransaction I got
Data push larger than necessary
What's wrong with this tx?
bitcoin-cli -testnet decoderawtransaction 020000000149d4a5f520ded6fa94f79cd268f0334baeec9a7732c9d946d1cdee58d81e7aad00000000020101ffffffff01904c96000000000017a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a048700000000
{
"txid": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"hash": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"version": 2,
"size": 85,
"vsize": 85,
"weight": 340,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "ad7a1ed858eecdd146d9c932779aecae4b33f068d29cf794fad6de20f5a5d449",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "1",
"hex": "0101"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.09850000,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_HASH160 f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a04 OP_EQUAL",
"hex": "a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a0487",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "scripthash",
"addresses": [
"2NFXJy8mvz7ZiT4VVN29xPGC38hTygd3AyJ"
]
}
}
]
}
bitcoind raw-transaction
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Looks like transaction decodes fine. But when I use sendrawtransaction I got
Data push larger than necessary
What's wrong with this tx?
bitcoin-cli -testnet decoderawtransaction 020000000149d4a5f520ded6fa94f79cd268f0334baeec9a7732c9d946d1cdee58d81e7aad00000000020101ffffffff01904c96000000000017a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a048700000000
{
"txid": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"hash": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"version": 2,
"size": 85,
"vsize": 85,
"weight": 340,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "ad7a1ed858eecdd146d9c932779aecae4b33f068d29cf794fad6de20f5a5d449",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "1",
"hex": "0101"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.09850000,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_HASH160 f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a04 OP_EQUAL",
"hex": "a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a0487",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "scripthash",
"addresses": [
"2NFXJy8mvz7ZiT4VVN29xPGC38hTygd3AyJ"
]
}
}
]
}
bitcoind raw-transaction
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
Looks like transaction decodes fine. But when I use sendrawtransaction I got
Data push larger than necessary
What's wrong with this tx?
bitcoin-cli -testnet decoderawtransaction 020000000149d4a5f520ded6fa94f79cd268f0334baeec9a7732c9d946d1cdee58d81e7aad00000000020101ffffffff01904c96000000000017a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a048700000000
{
"txid": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"hash": "1bbf569b281f2cd9d948e4273120a9bc3bb2c21e31bc9786682c0a22d8feb76c",
"version": 2,
"size": 85,
"vsize": 85,
"weight": 340,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "ad7a1ed858eecdd146d9c932779aecae4b33f068d29cf794fad6de20f5a5d449",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "1",
"hex": "0101"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.09850000,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_HASH160 f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a04 OP_EQUAL",
"hex": "a914f45d94733d430261962932e0c847075195916a0487",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "scripthash",
"addresses": [
"2NFXJy8mvz7ZiT4VVN29xPGC38hTygd3AyJ"
]
}
}
]
}
bitcoind raw-transaction
bitcoind raw-transaction
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
asked 2 days ago
Andrew
634
634
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Your scriptSig uses a data push to push 0x01 onto the stack. It could use OP_1 instead.
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Your transaction is failing validation with SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA, which is described in BIP 62 rule 3 protections against malleability. CheckMinimalPush() requires a push of 0x01 to be done using OP_1.
This standardness rule avoids the case where someone takes a transaction from the network and a push with a longer encoding of the same push and as a result creates a malleated form of the transaction.
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Your scriptSig uses a data push to push 0x01 onto the stack. It could use OP_1 instead.
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Your scriptSig uses a data push to push 0x01 onto the stack. It could use OP_1 instead.
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Your scriptSig uses a data push to push 0x01 onto the stack. It could use OP_1 instead.
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
Your scriptSig uses a data push to push 0x01 onto the stack. It could use OP_1 instead.
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
answered 2 days ago
Pieter Wuille
44.1k390151
44.1k390151
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
add a comment |
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
Thank you! But now I got "Script evaluated without error but finished with a false/empty top stack element)" Is this something wrong with my redeem script or scriptpubkey ?
– Andrew
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Your transaction is failing validation with SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA, which is described in BIP 62 rule 3 protections against malleability. CheckMinimalPush() requires a push of 0x01 to be done using OP_1.
This standardness rule avoids the case where someone takes a transaction from the network and a push with a longer encoding of the same push and as a result creates a malleated form of the transaction.
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Your transaction is failing validation with SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA, which is described in BIP 62 rule 3 protections against malleability. CheckMinimalPush() requires a push of 0x01 to be done using OP_1.
This standardness rule avoids the case where someone takes a transaction from the network and a push with a longer encoding of the same push and as a result creates a malleated form of the transaction.
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Your transaction is failing validation with SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA, which is described in BIP 62 rule 3 protections against malleability. CheckMinimalPush() requires a push of 0x01 to be done using OP_1.
This standardness rule avoids the case where someone takes a transaction from the network and a push with a longer encoding of the same push and as a result creates a malleated form of the transaction.
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
Your transaction is failing validation with SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA, which is described in BIP 62 rule 3 protections against malleability. CheckMinimalPush() requires a push of 0x01 to be done using OP_1.
This standardness rule avoids the case where someone takes a transaction from the network and a push with a longer encoding of the same push and as a result creates a malleated form of the transaction.
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
answered 2 days ago
G. Maxwell
2,316626
2,316626
add a comment |
add a comment |
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%2f81066%2ferror-while-send-transaction-data-push-larger-than-necessary%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
