(Corrected) Opinion of Filegroup Backups

[Louis]

Please ignore earlier post.

I've been experimenting with filegroup backups. I currently "archive"
old data by moving it into a different database. I thought I could
try to use filegroups instead. That is "archive" old data into a
read-only filegroup within the same DB. However, I ran into the
following and thinking about nixing the idea. Opinions?

a) MSSQL doesn't allow restoring a Filegroup as a new database.
(MSSQL only allows restoring the entire database as a new database).
It would have been convenient to restore e.g. the 1991 filegroup
archive as a new DB. Then compare this 1991 vs the 1991 data
currently online -- w/o having to restore the whole DB.

b) Bulk and non-logged operations prevents Filegroup backups/restores.
If you
do a select * into newtable from mytable. And then try to perform a
log backup, MSSQL ixnays it. A FG restore requires the log to be
restored as well. In my test DB, I went ahead and tried restoring the
FG only and it hosed the DB as it kept waiting for the log.