A search field and a scrolling progress indicator can both produce many events. They do not necessarily need the same response. The useful question is whether work should wait for a pause or continue periodically while the activity carries on.
MDN describes debouncing as grouping closely spaced calls, while throttling limits how often a function can run. Both reduce repeated work, but they produce different timing.
Read a short event timeline
Imagine input events at 0, 100 and 200 milliseconds. With a trailing debounce delay of 300 milliseconds, the work would run around 500 milliseconds if no further event arrived. Each new event postpones the pending call. These timings are an illustrative model; actual browser scheduling can add delay.
A throttle configured for a 300-millisecond interval can allow work during a longer continuous stream instead of waiting for the stream to stop. Whether it runs at the beginning, the end or both depends on the implementation and options. Read those details before choosing a library helper.
Choose the behaviour the interface needs
For a text search, waiting briefly after typing can avoid requests for every keystroke. For continuous movement, a controlled update rate may preserve feedback while limiting work. Neither technique should be applied automatically to actions whose every occurrence must be recorded.
Also consider the final state. A progress display that never receives the last update can remain visibly behind. A trailing call or an explicit completion update may be needed, depending on the chosen implementation.
Timing control does not solve request order
Debouncing a search does not guarantee that an older response cannot arrive after a newer one. Handle cancellation or response ordering separately. In a test, include sustained input, a single event, a pause and a component being removed with work still pending. Those cases reveal more than watching a smooth demonstration once.