Thanks. I'd be very interested.
I originally had added the HAVING clause to nastify it further, because this would cause values to appear and disappear, so to handle that you (probably?) have to materialise the entire result of the GROUP BY before applying a HAVING. Which is doable could cause some overhead.
I guess I could see it work for INSERT-only tables, with a lot of headache, but throw in UPDATE and DELETE and it could become awful.
Also we have to agree on what 'incrementally' means :)