What are the reason(s) why a PK will be implemented as USI instead of UPI? This question was formulated based on the following statement:
"Primary keys are implemented as unique secondary indexes for non-temporal tables..."

Hello All,
 
Can someone explain on what basis we select indexes for the columns in the field.
Following is my understand:
UPI -> When we have Unique value, which is evenly distributed to all the AMPS. (The column selected for UPI looks like a field Eligible for USI as well. Then how to decide?)

I understand that a SET table has an overhead of checking for duplicate rows while data is being inserted into the table. However, if the table has a UPI/USI defined on it, only the UPI/USI columns are checked for duplicates and not duplicate row checks. Is this understanding correct ?

Hi All,
    I have read that "For join performance, a NUPI can be a better choice than a UPI."
Someone please explain why is that? If it is a PI join then it is an same AMP operation how does NUPI will serve better than a UPI??

I have been fighting with this for weeks now. Basically I have .NET application that is using a teradata backend. I cannot for the life of me figure out why I keep getting this error, and it's random. The application itself does not specify any auto increment. I'm leaving that up to Teradata using the following create statement.

Again - this has been completely random. It can be from updating a record or creating a new record.

CREATE TABLE BCPM_DDBO.LTC_FBS
(FBS_ID INTEGER not null GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY
(START WITH 1
INCREMENT BY 1),
DBS_NM varchar(50),