The short: Let
$X= \{(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{C}^* \times \mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C} \, |\, yz-x\neq 0\}$
Compute $H^*_c(X)$ (say with $\mathbb{C}$-coefficients).
The long: Unless I messed something up, the answer should be
$H_c^3(X) = \mathbb{C}$, $H_c^4(X) = \mathbb{C}^2$, $H_c^5(X) = \mathbb{C}^2$, $H_c^6(X)=\mathbb{C}$, and $0$ otherwise.
However, as will become clear I did this through an extremely convoluted argument and I am hoping someone can explain to me a simple way of doing this.
Some context: this question is closely related to
Intersection of plus/minus cells in Bialynicki-Birula decomposition
Namely, $X$ is the intersection of the big Bruhat cell and the big opposite Bruhat cell for $SL_3$.
It is also closely related to
Are Kazhdan-Lusztig $R$-polynomials the Poincare polynomials of the corresponding affine varieties
(the Hodge-Euler characteristic of $X$ is the $R$-polynomial corresponding to the identity and the longest element in type $A_2$; this is a special case of a general fact about $R$-polynomials).
My convoluted argument: Considering the alternatives $y\neq 0$ and $y= 0$, one obtains a decomposition of $X$ into
$X = (\mathbb{C}^*)^3 \sqcup \mathbb{C}\times \mathbb{C}^*$.
This gives rise to a long exact sequence that puts several restrictions on $H^*(X)$ (but doesn't fully determine it, namely $H_c^3(X), H_c^4(X), H_c^5(X)$ aren't fully determined).
So far this is nice, but now the convoluted bit starts. It is not too hard to see that $H^{*-3}(X)$ equals $Ext^*(\Delta_e, \Delta_{w_0})$ where $\Delta_e$ is the unique simple Verma and $\Delta_{w_0}$ is the unique projective Verma in the principal block of the BGG-category $\mathcal{O}$ of $\mathfrak{sl}_3$.
Aside: this a special case of a statement connecting extensions of Verma modules with cohomology of intersections of Bruhat cells and opposite Bruhat cells (and also why I am interested in the cohomology of these intersections).
Now some standard representation theoretic facts about these $Hom$ spaces combined with the decomposition above yield what I claimed the answer to be.
I would love a simpler/more geometric way of going about this computation!