Timeline for Verification of transaction once trasaction is broadcasted
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:53 | comment | added | Frankenstein | oohh I think here concept of index comes into picture which gives information about unspent transaction. Thank you for patiently answering my questions. | |
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:49 | comment | added | David Schwartz | Yes, it will be checked. The system behaves as if every input of every transaction is checked to see if it was spent by any other transaction that has ever been processed. (Of course, obvious optimizations are done. For example, servers keep track of all unspent outputs so it's just a "does this set contain this value" operation.) | |
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:39 | comment | added | Frankenstein | Ok Just consider this scenario, if I have two transactions which are assigned to me and I want to spend them, then if I try to double spend them by doing single transaction (using both as input ) today and then again using same transactions 10 years after. Is this a possible scenario and if yes will it be checked in network? | |
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:31 | comment | added | David Schwartz | In a double spend, whichever transaction comes second will try to spend outputs that have already been spent. That will render the block invalid. (So no miner would create a block with a double spend as they would get no reward. But if they did, everyone would just ignore it since it's invalid.) | |
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:25 | comment | added | Frankenstein | I think I should dig more about block creation. Thanks for your answer. Regarding question 3, then how double spending is checked for broadcasted trasaction? | |
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:25 | vote | accept | Frankenstein | ||
| Mar 11, 2014 at 8:20 | history | answered | David Schwartz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |