When a pass of CreateTransaction fails to select enough bitcoin to meet the nFeeNeeded the next pass through may select a far smaller collection of inputs.  Currently it will continue to use the old fee amount based on the larger set of inputs, which can cause a non-trivial over-payment.

This may be the cause of the behavior reported here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5ltw5n/bitcoin_core_v0131_sends_enormously_high_fee/

Long ago fixing this was tricky due to a catch-22 between signing the transaction and knowing how much fee was required.  But after #9465 the whole algorithm will run using a dummy signature, so when there is already a change output fixing up the fee after finding a sufficient transaction should be a matter of a ~2 line change.

{
            for (unsigned int i = 0; i < vValue.size(); i++)
            {
                
                
                
                
                
                
                if (nPass == 0 ? insecure_rand.rand32()&1 : !vfIncluded[i])
                {
                    nTotal += vValue[i].first;
                    vfIncluded[i] = true;
                    if (nTotal >= nTargetValue)
                    {
                        fReachedTarget = true;
                        if (nTotal < nBest)
                        {
                            nBest = nTotal;
                            vfBest = vfIncluded;
                        }
                        nTotal -= vValue[i].first;
                        vfIncluded[i] = false;
                    }
                }
            }
        }
    }
}
bool CWallet::SelectCoinsMinConf(const CAmount& nTargetValue, const int nConfMine, const int nConfTheirs, const uint64_t nMaxAncestors, vector<COutput> vCoins,