This may look plausible at first glance, but to prove a memory leak you would have to show that 1) the fields point to dynamically allocated memory that 2) fts5 is responsible for and 3) is not already freed before the disconnct/destroy methods are called. Alternatively you can run a repcase that shows a) excessive memory growth proportional to the repeat count when executed repeatedly, or b) shows "definitely lost" blocks when run under Valgrind or similar tools' control.