44278 total vector count; avg 1 term/freq
> vector fields per doc]
> No problems were detected with this index.
>
> 2011-04-06
>
> 袁武 [GMail]
> ____________________
> 发件人： Michael McCandless
> 发送时间： 2011-04-02 21:11:05
> 收件人
a-user
主题： Re: Re: Re: A likely bug of TermsPosition.nextPosition
So your test case still hits the exception in 3.1?
If you fully rebuild you index in 3.1, does the exception still occur?
Is there any way I could get access to this index?
Do other terms besides "\1" have the problem
me a new recent copy of CheckIndex in jar, I will run it and
send you the report as soon as possible.
Great thanks.
2011-04-06
袁武 [GMail]
发件人： Michael McCandless
发送时间： 2011-04-02 21:11:05
收件人： 袁武 [GMail]
抄送： java-user
主题： Re: Re: Re: A likely bug of TermsPosition.nextPosition
So
So your test case still hits the exception in 3.1?
If you fully rebuild you index in 3.1, does the exception still occur?
Is there any way I could get access to this index?
Do other terms besides "\1" have the problem?
I just committed a change to the 3.x branch
(https://svn.apache.org/repos/as
Dear Mike:
The index was constructed using Lucene 2.9. After the problem occured, I
switched to recently release Lucene 3.1, leaving the index untouched.
Thanks to your help
2011-04-02
袁武 [GMail]
发件人： Michael McCandless
发送时间： 2011-04-02 00:13:35
收件人： 袁武 [GMail]
抄送： java-user
主题：
Hi, Dear exports:
The below case runs ok:
public void test() throws IOException {
IndexSearcher is = null;
TermPositions tp = null;
try {
is = GenericStorage.getInstance().getSearcher();
tp =
