When we allowed using HAVING clause without GROUP BY (b40f2443), one
possible combination was forgotten to be tested:

SELECT 1 FROM te40 HAVING SUM(s1) < 0;
-- And SUM(s1) >= 0, i.e. HAVING condition is false.

In other words, resulting set contains no aggregates, but HAVING does
contain, but condition is false. In this case no byte-code related to
aggregate execution is emitted at all. Hence, query above equals to
simple SELECT 1; Unfortunately, result of such query is the same when
condition under HAVING clause is unsatisfied.  To fix this behaviour, it
is enough to indicate to byte-code generator that we should analyze
aggregates not only in ORDER BY clauses, but also in HAVING clause.

Closes #3932
Follow-up #2364