insufficient fee, rejecting replacement (Failed to submit won block 666155 off block 666154 instead used 666152 even though 666153 and 666154 were known)

[friedger]

Describe the bug
I won a block and then submitted off an older block even though I have committed to the younger blocks. From stacks-dump:

666152 1 666151 69 br1$ s:425c38deca p:fe60d3cf13 c:8b80648142 i:3312a8d43a b:00000000000000000007 @+ 315000  69> SP137NZXD0 (30) SP1ER0V0WX (110) SP1K1A1PMG (20) SP25Y6NQXB*(40) SP2HFBWV0D (20) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) SPY1PP2KZ6 (15) 
666153 1 666152 70 br1$ s:fa7b09b77e p:425c38deca c:928ad57479 i:3840b588f4 b:00000000000000000000 @+ 315000  70> SP137NZXD0 (30) SP1ER0V0WX (110) SP1K1A1PMG (20) SP25Y6NQXB*(40) SP2HFBWV0D (20) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) SPY1PP2KZ6 (15) 
666154 1 666153 71 br1$ s:9753fa66b0 p:fa7b09b77e c:b5ba84fecc i:fe6ed1bfed b:00000000000000000006 @@ 315000  71> SP137NZXD0 (30) SP1ER0V0WX*(110) SP1K1A1PMG (20) SP25Y6NQXB (40) SP2HFBWV0D (20) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) SPY1PP2KZ6 (15) 
666155 3 666152 70 br7  s:fd4ca61313 p:425c38deca c:d688026dc2 i:a0a2079af8 b:0000000000000000000d    700000  70  SP137NZXD0 (30) SP1ER0V0WX (110) SP1K1A1PMG*(20) SP1RJH1641 (400) SP25Y6NQXB (40) SP2HFBWV0D (20) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) 

Expected behavior
Build off 666154

Additional context
From the log:

Succeeded assembling Stacks block #72: 6597d692fee25ebec60cd792aaa3c81e59623db56d5028e323dbd864b967a3ea, with 13 txs, attempt 13

Bitcoin RPC failure: transaction submission failed - Network("Bitcoin RPC: status(500) != success, body is \'Object({\"error\": Object({\"code\": Number(-26), \"message\": String(\"insufficient fee, rejecting replacement 9b033bb2544bc94b6a341b3fd81a068bc361a94c1ba15165eead6cbb9a6731ba, not enough additional fees to relay; 0.00000349 < 0.00000351\")}), \"id\": String(\"stacks\"), \"result\": Null})\'")
WARN [1610704687.972301] [testnet/stacks-node/src/neon_node.rs:1638] [relayer] Failed to submit Bitcoin transaction

[friedger]

Same here:

666209 1 666208 114 br1$ s:3c97ab9b90 p:9db7a445cd c:efed8c81f3 i:637b7370d5 b:00000000000000000008 @+ 220000  114> SP137NZXD0 (20) SP1K1A1PMG (80) SP25Y6NQXB*(40) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) 
666210 1 666209 115 br1  s:5543a8cd85 p:3c97ab9b90 c:2e63a15a47 i:0fe39b03e5 b:00000000000000000006 @@ 240000  115> SP137NZXD0 (20) SP1K1A1PMG (80) SP25Y6NQXB (40) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2*(20) SP4NK85F5Y (20) 
666211 2 666209 115 br10$ s:281a72bf9c p:3c97ab9b90 c:5852ced766 i:78e17cac47 b:0000000000000000000a    240000  115  SP137NZXD0 (20) SP1K1A1PMG*(80) SP25Y6NQXB (40) SP334VW9T9 (60) SP3F0CDFN2 (20) SP4NK85F5Y (20) 

[psq]

using the size of the previous transaction is not good enough apparently. Seeing variations of 338 - 352 bytes, so either we need to calculate actual tx size, or pad by at least 14

[lgalabru]

Should be addressed with #2383

[lgalabru]

Addressed with https://github.com/blockstack/stacks-blockchain/releases/tag/2.0.3

[blockstack-devops]

This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.