SAW-TOPSIS Implementation To Determine An Appropriate DBMS Software


  • Rini Anggrainingsih Department of Informatics, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.
  • Aditya Wiyanto Department of Informatics, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.
  • Abdul Aziz Department of Informatics, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.


Database Management System, Decision Support, SAW, TOPSIS,


Selection an appropriate Database Management Software, is a crucial part to ensure operational excellence businesses firm. Database management software used to organize and manage the company’s data so that they can be efficiently accessed and used to improve operational and decision quality. However, a senior manager as decision maker sometimes lacks the comprehensive knowledge to choose a suitable database management software which meets with business needs. Then, The manager determines a database management software based on a consultant or vendor offer. On the other hand, a consultant or vendor has an interest in to sell their product, so they tend to lead manager to choose their product even though it is not fulfilling business needs. We present a decision support application to help the manager to select an appropriate database management software (DBM) for their company, using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method. We observe SQL Server, MySQL, Oracle, DB2, and PostgreSQL as five top database management software and investigate the detail about cost, storage capacity, security, supported the operating system and supported programming language as key criteria to select best database management software from their official website. Then, we combining SAW and TOPSIS method to choose the best appropriate DBM software based on user requirement through computation program and validate our application performance includes the user interface, usability and accuracy result to 50 database engineers expert as respondent. The results are as follows; 1) 86 % of respondents are satisfied with application user interface, 2) 94% are happy with application usability and 3) 86% are pleased with the accuracy of the computation. Overall, this study provides a decision support application to determine an appropriate database management software based on business needs by combining SAW and TOPSIS methods.


C. S. Mullins, "," TechTarget, 2016. [Online]. Available: [Accessed 10 October 2016].

E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-criteria decision-making methods: a comparative study, Louisiana: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

L. Abdullah dan C. R. Adawiyah, “Simple Additive Weighting Methods of Multi criteria Decision Making and Applications: A Decade Review,” International Journal of Information Processing and Management(IJIPM), vol. 5, no. 1, p. 39, 2014.

R. E. Setyani dan R. Saputra, “Flood-prone Areas Mapping at Semarang City By Using Simple Additive Weighting Method,” CITIES 2015 International Conference, Intelligent Planning Towards Smart Cities, Surabaya, 2016.

N. E. P, S. W. Sihwi dan R. Anggrainingsih, “Sistem Penunjang Keputusan Untuk Menentukan Lokasi Usaha Dengan Metode Simple Additive Weighting (SAW),” ITSmart, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 41-46, 2014.

M. Ning, S. Mengjie dan D. Shiming, “Application of TOPSIS method in evaluating the effects of supply vane angle of a task/ambient air conditioning system on energy utilization and thermal comfort,” Applied Energy, vol. 180, pp. 536-545, 2016.

L. Kurniasih, “Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Laptop dengan Metode TOPSIS,” Pelita Inform. budi Darma, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 6-13, 2015.

T.-Y. Chen, “Comparative analysis of SAW and TOPSIS based on interval-valued fuzzy sets: Discussions on score functions and weight constraints,” Ting-Yu Chen, vol. 39, pp. 1848-1861, 2012.

S. Kusumadewi, S. Hartati, A. Harjoko dan R. Wardoyo, Fuzzy Multiple-Attribute Decision Making (Fuzzy MADM). 1st ed., Yogyakarta: Penerbit Graha Ilmu, 2006.

I.Kaliszewski dan D.Podkopaev, “Simple additive weighting—A metamodel for multiple criteria decision analysis methods,” Expert Systems With Applications, vol. 54, pp. 155-161, 2016.

Microsoft, “Microsoft store,” Microsoft, 3 10 2015. [Online]. Available: 2014-Standard-Edition/productID.298540100. [Diakses 3 10 2015].

MySQL, “MySQL,” MySQL, 28 10 2015. [Online]. Available: [Diakses 28 10 2015].

Oracle, “Oracle,” Oracle, 4 11 2015. [Online]. Available: [Diakses 4 11 2015].

Ibm, “Ibm,” Ibm, 29 11 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www- [Diakses 29 11 2015].

PostgreSQL, “PostgreSQL,” PostgreSQL, 25 11 2015. [Online]. Available: [Diakses 25 11 2015].

P. Dave, “SQL Authority,” SQL Authority, 21 7 2013. [Online]. Available: [Diakses 14 11 2015].

Stack overflow, “Stack overflow,” Stack overflow, 6 5 2014. [Online]. Available: [Diakses 12 11 2015].

DB-Engine, “DB-Engine,” DB-Engine, [Online]. Available: [Diakses 22 12 2015].




How to Cite

Anggrainingsih, R., Wiyanto, A., & Aziz, A. (2018). SAW-TOPSIS Implementation To Determine An Appropriate DBMS Software. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 10(2-4), 101–105. Retrieved from