Quote from: ABCbits on February 13, 2025, 08:54:26 AM

Since you don't mention when those UTXO dust created, i would speculate most of them are created by Ordinals. See https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/118262.

I'll need to do some more digging into what exactly Ordinals are. I'm still cleaning up the data. I discovered that about 140m of my utxos seem to be OP_RETURN and have an amount of 0.00000000 but are marked as unspent (or rather, were never spent after being created). I'm guessing these were just place markers for people to add comments to the chain? I ordered these by script type and 99.9% of them are of type nulldata.

I'm trying to decide if I should extract these into a separate table to maintain the ingerity (in case in the future I want to distinguish them for some other purpose), or simply mark them as false for the is_spent column to get them out of the way when I do queries on spendable utxos. I suppose I could just exclude them by the nulldata association? Thinking out loud here...

Quote from: Findingnemo on February 13, 2025, 07:07:32 PM

OP can verify this data by analysing the dust accumulation over the time and see if it's spikes exactly when the ordinals started spamming the network.

The other contributors are some wallets which doesn't allow coin control lead to created unnecessary dust amount into the change address.

Good idea. Once I can run some more efficient queries, I'll look at clustering them by data/time.