I got to try out my Glo-toob FX in the field two weekends ago when went for a nice long walk and overnight camp in the Brecon Beacons.
The Glo-Toob is a cylinder measuring 70mm x 19mm and weighing in at only 34g. It takes a small, high-capacity battery. Light is provided via a set of LEDs that bounce of a clever polished metal cone at one end of the cylinder. The light spread is surprisingly uniform given the directionality of LEDs.
It's a fun little piece of kit. I'd had a hope that it would provide enough light to read by; it doesn't. Even in my fairly small one-man Scarp 1 tent you get the sort of ambient light that your mother would tell you off for trying to read by.
The Scarp has a nice hook in the centre of the roof which is perfect for hanging a small lantern like the Glo-toob.
Far be it from me to suggest the Glo-toob isn't worth having; it's definitely part of my standard kit now. It's so light you'll never notice the added weight, and it really is tiny. It's nice having an omni-directional light source on in the tent without having to faff about with a head-torch to find things. And you can leave the light on when you need to step outside for an, er, well you know.
Hopefully, the next time I get out to the hills it won't be raining and blowing a ferocious gale all night and I'll be able to take a night-time shot to show the comforting glow of this little lantern.
Friday 19 November 2010
A night on Waun Lefrith
I visited the Brecon Beacons for my first time the weekend before last. I'd driven through there before, on my way to the north of Wales usually, but never stopped to take in a walk. I'd been itching to try out my new Scarp 1 and a few magazine articles and blog posts had planted the idea that it might be worth taking in some of the Carmarthen Fans before the weather turned too cold for the current state of my outdoor gear.
I'd meant to do a full write-up of the outing but I left it too long between walking and writing, so every time I sat down to put pen to paper (keyboard to screen?) the story came out sounding contrived.
So I'm just going to post to pictures, instead.
I'd meant to do a full write-up of the outing but I left it too long between walking and writing, so every time I sat down to put pen to paper (keyboard to screen?) the story came out sounding contrived.
So I'm just going to post to pictures, instead.
Friday 12 November 2010
Veeam Backup SNMP trap bug
Today I got confirmation that the baffling behaviour I was seeing in the onBackupJobCompleted SNMP trap payload is in fact an actual bug. Result!
For the benefit of others who may find this, the onBackupJobCompleted trap is sent with a payload of four objects:
backupJobName is exactly what you'd expect, and even backupJobComments is reasonably self-explanatory.
The bug is with the backupJobResult field, which at the moment contains the string "None" regardless of the actual job outcome.
As I said earlier, Veeam have confirmed this is a real bug that effects the initial release version of Veeam Backup and Replication v5, and will be fixed in the next release; but they haven't been forthcoming with a release date yet. So that makes this particular trap just about useless right now.
For the benefit of others who may find this, the onBackupJobCompleted trap is sent with a payload of four objects:
- backupJobId
- backupJobName
- backupJobResult
- backupJobComment
backupJobName is exactly what you'd expect, and even backupJobComments is reasonably self-explanatory.
The bug is with the backupJobResult field, which at the moment contains the string "None" regardless of the actual job outcome.
As I said earlier, Veeam have confirmed this is a real bug that effects the initial release version of Veeam Backup and Replication v5, and will be fixed in the next release; but they haven't been forthcoming with a release date yet. So that makes this particular trap just about useless right now.
VCAP recap
Yesterday was the big day. I spent more of my day on the train into central London than I did in the exam suite, but only just! The beta exam clocked in at just under 4 hours as they threw more questions at us than you're likely to get in the shipping version of the exam.
And it was tough, too. Two weeks of cramming isn't enough time to get it all down. They're testing knowledge of a lot of subjects across technical, design, and project arenas with a broad mixture of highly conceptual and disturbingly specific questions. Not surprisingly it's all covered in the official exam blueprint, and studying the recommended reading from the blueprint will prepare you for the exam, but in much the same way that reading the entire unabridged edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica will prepare you for the local pub quiz. There's no substitute for experience here, and my lack of experience with large design projects was a handicap. But I was expecting that.
The beta exam allowed for less than 2 minutes per question which put the pressure on, especially when there were certain classes of interactive question that demanded 5-10 minutes each. Since you have no idea what types of questions are coming, time management is very difficult, particularly towards the end. Do I rush through these multiple choice questions just in case there's a big one coming up, or take a more considered approach and risk running out of time? I went for the former and actually ended up with 8 minutes in hand at the end. It made me feel like I'd chosen wrong.
Frequently I found there wasn't enough space on the screen for the question. It was frustrating to have to answer questions against a scenario when the scenario ran off the right-hand edge of the screen. Worse were the interactive questions that didn't leave enough space on the screen to create an answer. I don't know if this is a general problem or if the testing centre I visited were just running too low a screen resolution. There were a lot of basic proof-reading and clarity of meaning issues.
I doubt it will matter though. I fully expect the exam grade will be based on a weighted sum across different subject areas and a fail in, say, the projecty bit won't make up for good performance in, say, a logical designy bit. On balance, I'm expecting a fail because of my performance on a couple of sections that I just don't have enough background in to feel confident in.
The afterward made it sound like only those who passed would be contacted once VMware had had time to collate and review all the beta test scores, so I may never know just how badly I've done :)
And it was tough, too. Two weeks of cramming isn't enough time to get it all down. They're testing knowledge of a lot of subjects across technical, design, and project arenas with a broad mixture of highly conceptual and disturbingly specific questions. Not surprisingly it's all covered in the official exam blueprint, and studying the recommended reading from the blueprint will prepare you for the exam, but in much the same way that reading the entire unabridged edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica will prepare you for the local pub quiz. There's no substitute for experience here, and my lack of experience with large design projects was a handicap. But I was expecting that.
The beta exam allowed for less than 2 minutes per question which put the pressure on, especially when there were certain classes of interactive question that demanded 5-10 minutes each. Since you have no idea what types of questions are coming, time management is very difficult, particularly towards the end. Do I rush through these multiple choice questions just in case there's a big one coming up, or take a more considered approach and risk running out of time? I went for the former and actually ended up with 8 minutes in hand at the end. It made me feel like I'd chosen wrong.
Frequently I found there wasn't enough space on the screen for the question. It was frustrating to have to answer questions against a scenario when the scenario ran off the right-hand edge of the screen. Worse were the interactive questions that didn't leave enough space on the screen to create an answer. I don't know if this is a general problem or if the testing centre I visited were just running too low a screen resolution. There were a lot of basic proof-reading and clarity of meaning issues.
I doubt it will matter though. I fully expect the exam grade will be based on a weighted sum across different subject areas and a fail in, say, the projecty bit won't make up for good performance in, say, a logical designy bit. On balance, I'm expecting a fail because of my performance on a couple of sections that I just don't have enough background in to feel confident in.
The afterward made it sound like only those who passed would be contacted once VMware had had time to collate and review all the beta test scores, so I may never know just how badly I've done :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)